If you like voting Republican because of the "fiscal conservatism," never mind that they tend to run up the biggest deficits - let's also be very clear what you're inherently supporting with your vote - an aggressive and intrusive pro-life position.
This article is from an ECONOMIC newsletter that I receive, one that's SO conservative that sometimes it causes me to gnash my teeth. This is what an educated, thinking conservative believes about the pro-life movement (this is a fair use excerpt, not my work:)
In the latest battle between pro-choicers and pro-lifers, in March of this year, South Dakota passed legislation to ban all abortions, except those that are necessary to save a woman's life.
Of course, state law cannot override the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling by the Supreme Court that protects the right to an abortion under the Fourth Amendment's right to privacy. So why the new state law?
Simple. If pro-choice groups like Planned Parenthood challenge South Dakota's decision in court, the issue might be taken all the way to the top. Which is exactly what the state's lawmakers hope for. With the help of pro-life Supreme Court judges like Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas--as well as the recently appointed conservatives John Roberts and Samuel Alito--they believe Roe v. Wade may soon be a goner. Which could in turn trigger a landslide of anti-abortion legislation in other states.
According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a non-profit corporation for reproductive health research, policy analysis and public education, 18 states currently have laws in place that could be used to restrict abortions.
Illinois, Kentucky and Louisiana have so-called "trigger" laws that would come into effect as soon as Roe v. Wade has been overturned. And in 13 other states--Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin--a pre-Roe abortion ban is still on the books. In some cases, like Vermont, the ban was deemed unconstitutional by the state's Supreme Court and so might not be immediately enforceable in the event of a Roe repeal at the federal level.
While we will duck addressing the morality of one side of the underlying arguments or another, we thought a look at the possible consequences of an overturning of Roe v. Wade would be of interest.
And on that front, no place in the world provides a more useful or current model than El Salvador.
In an April 9 article titled "Pro-Life Nation," the New York Times Magazine reported: "In this new movement toward criminalization, El Salvador is in the vanguard. The array of exceptions that tend to exist even in countries where abortion is circumscribed--rape, incest, fetal malformation, life of the mother--don't apply in El Salvador. They were rejected in the late 1990's, in a period after the country's long civil war ended. The country's penal system was revamped and its constitution was amended. Abortion is now absolutely forbidden in every possible circumstance. No exceptions."
What that kind of harsh legislation can lead to is vividly described by NYT journalist Jack Hitt: "El Salvador... has not only a total ban on abortion but also an active law-enforcement apparatus--the police, investigators, medical spies, forensic vagina inspectors and a special division of the prosecutor's office responsible for Crimes Against Minors and Women, a unit charged with capturing, trying and incarcerating an unusual kind of criminal."
Generally, the abortion provider faces 6 to 12 years in prison, the woman herself 2 to 8 years, and anyone who helps her 2 to 5 years. Still, if it is deemed that the fetus was viable, prison time for the woman can be upped to 30-50 years.
Far from preventing abortions altogether, the country's strict laws have driven women to back-alley abortions and do-it-yourself attempts, with varying success.
Since their implementation, teen suicide attempts have mysteriously skyrocketed. "According to a study on attempted suicide and teen pregnancy published last year by academics at the University of El Salvador, some girls who poison their wombs with agricultural pesticide (its efficacy being a Salvadoran urban legend) would rather report the cause of their resulting hospital visit as 'attempted suicide,' which is not as felonious a crime nor as socially unbearable as abortion," states Hitt.
A popular solution among Salvadoran women is the ulcer drug misoprostol that, when inserted in the vagina, can cause contractions and bleeding that will look like a miscarriage to hospital personnel.
Hospital staff is obliged to report suspicious cases to the authorities. Investigators will then come in and start gathering evidence for an abortion, including interviews with family and friends, the woman's medical records, and forensic exams of her vagina and uterus as a "search of the crime scene."
The flipside, says Hitt, are the truly life-threatening complications that can arise, for example in the case of an ectopic pregnancy. In an ectopic pregnancy, the fertilized egg fails to move into the uterus and instead gets stuck in the fallopian tube--a condition that, as the fetus grows, inevitably leads to the rupture of the fallopian tube, killing the fetus and often the mother as well.
But under El Salvador law, physicians are not allowed to terminate a woman's pregnancy until it is certain that the fetus is dead, no matter what the risks for the mother--which has proven to be a precarious tightrope walk for hospital emergency staff.
However oppressive the Salvadoran abortion laws, some U.S. pundits seem to find them appealing. Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, head of Virginia-based Human Life International, says "El Salvador is an inspiration," calling it an important victory in the "counterrevolution of conscience." And Rep. Jim DeMint (SC-R), when asked in a 2004 interview with Tim Russert whether he would prosecute the woman in cases of abortion, danced around the issue by suggesting that "Congress should outlaw all abortions first and worry about the fallout later."
Act first, think later: A virtual guarantee for trouble ahead.
[We'd like to hear our readers' opinion on this no doubt emotion-laden matter. Send us your thoughts at feedback@caseyresearch.com.]
DJHJD
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Tuesday - waiting for the monsoon
Which (the monsoon) seems not to be coming. I've been cleaning these last few minutes; reorganizing the metal desk, going through unpaid bills and indexing them, going through paid bills and filing them, trying to create more space for myself here. it's not all glamour, you know!
For my next trick, a bunch of shredding! Then, I'll have the room to spread these papers out and sort them. My filing stack just keeps getting bigger, and bigger. Maybe tonight.
three hours later
Well, some amazing things have taken place - I laminated the men's health wallet cards that I've been toting around for nearly ten years - FINALLY. Now, I just have to cut them into individual cards and voila!
I've folded, tossed, shredded, cleaned, organized, tallied, paid, written ..
For my next trick, a bunch of shredding! Then, I'll have the room to spread these papers out and sort them. My filing stack just keeps getting bigger, and bigger. Maybe tonight.
three hours later
Well, some amazing things have taken place - I laminated the men's health wallet cards that I've been toting around for nearly ten years - FINALLY. Now, I just have to cut them into individual cards and voila!
I've folded, tossed, shredded, cleaned, organized, tallied, paid, written ..
Monday, July 24, 2006
Monday, Monday ver. 826.01
So, last night, I was fiddling around on the internet ('cause that's what I do.) In my fiddling, I went from big airplanes for sale (because I saw one on a newsgroup) to little airplanes for sale (scale models) to looking for little Hitler airplanes to finding out that Hitler's personal airplane in 1938 was painted EXACTLY the way I dreamed it.
How about that? Isn't that something?
Been working today; filing, receipts, research, loans, paperwork, teleconference, lunch with Chuck, reaming out the HEB pharma manager, picking up the mail, making bank deposits, paying bills, emails, writing a business proposal.. and laundry. I still feel like I was lazy today.
I'm watching "Foul Play" with Chevy Chase and Goldie Hawn. Seeing all of the cars from my teen years is pretty cool. I had forgotten the car chase scene with the Japanese couple who are in the back of the highjacked limo. Fun stuff.
Talked a bunch with Secret Agent Man again today. Was hoping to spend time with him.
I guess it's time to start looking for another place to hang my hat(s.) This place is going to be unavailable in about another six weeks.
How about that? Isn't that something?
Been working today; filing, receipts, research, loans, paperwork, teleconference, lunch with Chuck, reaming out the HEB pharma manager, picking up the mail, making bank deposits, paying bills, emails, writing a business proposal.. and laundry. I still feel like I was lazy today.
I'm watching "Foul Play" with Chevy Chase and Goldie Hawn. Seeing all of the cars from my teen years is pretty cool. I had forgotten the car chase scene with the Japanese couple who are in the back of the highjacked limo. Fun stuff.
Talked a bunch with Secret Agent Man again today. Was hoping to spend time with him.
I guess it's time to start looking for another place to hang my hat(s.) This place is going to be unavailable in about another six weeks.
Sunday, July 23, 2006
Sunday evening signals
So, the last four days have been jam-packed with work, meetings, driving, church, meals, more driving, telephone calls until the battery is dead, more meals, more driving, more church, more driving...
And two naps.
Last night, watched a great movie - now watching another. You can check out what movies I've been watching on my 360 site, or you could ask to be a netflix friend with me.
I'm assiduously avoiding the telephone tonight - i need some decompression time before another packed work week. I need to work on the church's website tonight, though.
And two naps.
Last night, watched a great movie - now watching another. You can check out what movies I've been watching on my 360 site, or you could ask to be a netflix friend with me.
I'm assiduously avoiding the telephone tonight - i need some decompression time before another packed work week. I need to work on the church's website tonight, though.
What Did You Expect, America?
From Daily Kos
by SusanG
Sat Jul 22, 2006 at 03:16:59 PM PDT
Would you hire a babysitter who hates children and thinks they should be eliminated? Or who declares for years in your hearing that children are irritants who should be starved to be small, unseen and mute?
Would you hire cops who think laws are stupid and useless and should be abolished?
Would you hire a conductor for your orchestra who believes music itself an abomination?
Then why would you hire - and you did hire them, America; they are your employees, after all, not your rulers, despite their grandiose pretensions - members of a political party who think government is useless, ineffective, bloated and untrustworthy?
You've hired for your kitchen the chef who spits in your food because he despises preparing meals.
You've hired for your yardwork the gardener who sets out to kill your roses to demonstrate his assertion that they will die in your climate.
You've hired for your office the accountant who's staked his career on proving no accurate books can be kept.
In electing Republicans, America, you put people in charge of institutions they overtly, caustically loathe and proudly proclaim should not exist. Good thinking, USA, and stellar results: Katrina, Iraq, Medicare D, trade and budget deficits, mine disasters and on and on and on and ...
Conservatives have declared officially for decades that they hate public programs and love private business. Why then, do Americans profess shock when these same people run the public credit card up to bunker-busting levels to line the pockets of friendly corporations, leaving taxpayers - current and the as-yet unborn - the bill? It's the dine and ditch mentality writ large, and American citizens are the unfortunate waiters having their lowly pay docked to cover the deadbeat loss - and their future grandchildren's pay docked as well.
We are witnessing an orchestrated, unprecedented transfer of public wealth to private pockets, a national one-party feeding frenzy that's making beggars and beseechers of us all, and yet many Americans stand around muttering in a daze of semi-apathetic befuddlement about gosh darn how did all this come to be and how sure as shit, uh-huh, those Republicans shore were right, government doesn't do a the little guy a damn bit of good, no sirree bob. Better drown it some more. Cut them taxes, privatize something, anything, pronto!
Kee-rist on a pogo stick.
If you put people in charge of running a project they are ideologically committed to proving a failure, it will fail.
Seems pretty straightforward to me. But hey, I'm a Democrat. You know, one of those people who think universal quality public education is a massive good to society, that maintaining our highways and levees and bridges and dams is part of what makes this country great, that paying first-responders and nurses what they're worth helps guarantee our public health and safety, that providing for fellow citizens who fall on hard times is not only the ethical thing to do, but the pragmatic one, ensuring that this country does not incubate a permanently inflamed and disgruntled underclass ready to drop a match on a pool of social gasoline.
Here's a thought - just a thought, mind you, beloved America: Perhaps it's time to return to government the party that has an ideological stake in making it ... you know ... succeed. Maybe, just maybe, it's time to raise our sights a wee bit and elect people who think public service is more than an opportunity for the "Biggest! Fire Sale! Ever!" for their friends and loved ones. Perhaps it's time to insist on greater - if not great - expectations from the employees we decide to hire or fire every two years to carry out our will under the constitution.
As one-party Republican rule has clearly shown, when you expect incompetence, corruption and deceit from your government, you get exactly what you vote for. In spades.
by SusanG
Sat Jul 22, 2006 at 03:16:59 PM PDT
Would you hire a babysitter who hates children and thinks they should be eliminated? Or who declares for years in your hearing that children are irritants who should be starved to be small, unseen and mute?
Would you hire cops who think laws are stupid and useless and should be abolished?
Would you hire a conductor for your orchestra who believes music itself an abomination?
Then why would you hire - and you did hire them, America; they are your employees, after all, not your rulers, despite their grandiose pretensions - members of a political party who think government is useless, ineffective, bloated and untrustworthy?
You've hired for your kitchen the chef who spits in your food because he despises preparing meals.
You've hired for your yardwork the gardener who sets out to kill your roses to demonstrate his assertion that they will die in your climate.
You've hired for your office the accountant who's staked his career on proving no accurate books can be kept.
In electing Republicans, America, you put people in charge of institutions they overtly, caustically loathe and proudly proclaim should not exist. Good thinking, USA, and stellar results: Katrina, Iraq, Medicare D, trade and budget deficits, mine disasters and on and on and on and ...
Conservatives have declared officially for decades that they hate public programs and love private business. Why then, do Americans profess shock when these same people run the public credit card up to bunker-busting levels to line the pockets of friendly corporations, leaving taxpayers - current and the as-yet unborn - the bill? It's the dine and ditch mentality writ large, and American citizens are the unfortunate waiters having their lowly pay docked to cover the deadbeat loss - and their future grandchildren's pay docked as well.
We are witnessing an orchestrated, unprecedented transfer of public wealth to private pockets, a national one-party feeding frenzy that's making beggars and beseechers of us all, and yet many Americans stand around muttering in a daze of semi-apathetic befuddlement about gosh darn how did all this come to be and how sure as shit, uh-huh, those Republicans shore were right, government doesn't do a the little guy a damn bit of good, no sirree bob. Better drown it some more. Cut them taxes, privatize something, anything, pronto!
Kee-rist on a pogo stick.
If you put people in charge of running a project they are ideologically committed to proving a failure, it will fail.
Seems pretty straightforward to me. But hey, I'm a Democrat. You know, one of those people who think universal quality public education is a massive good to society, that maintaining our highways and levees and bridges and dams is part of what makes this country great, that paying first-responders and nurses what they're worth helps guarantee our public health and safety, that providing for fellow citizens who fall on hard times is not only the ethical thing to do, but the pragmatic one, ensuring that this country does not incubate a permanently inflamed and disgruntled underclass ready to drop a match on a pool of social gasoline.
Here's a thought - just a thought, mind you, beloved America: Perhaps it's time to return to government the party that has an ideological stake in making it ... you know ... succeed. Maybe, just maybe, it's time to raise our sights a wee bit and elect people who think public service is more than an opportunity for the "Biggest! Fire Sale! Ever!" for their friends and loved ones. Perhaps it's time to insist on greater - if not great - expectations from the employees we decide to hire or fire every two years to carry out our will under the constitution.
As one-party Republican rule has clearly shown, when you expect incompetence, corruption and deceit from your government, you get exactly what you vote for. In spades.
Friday, July 21, 2006
Matthews, Buchanan Eviscerate Neocons
From Daily Kos
by georgia10
Fri Jul 21, 2006 at 07:04:02 AM PDT
I have a love-hate relationship with Chris Matthews. OK, it's mostly a hate relationship, in that I hate his documented record of being so misleading and so fundamentally wrong on so many issues.
But, I must give credit where credit is due. In those rare occasions where Matthews gets it right, he hits it out of the ballpark.
As Hunter pointed out, Newt Gingrich, Bill O'Reilly, Bill Kristol, Rich Lowry, and Rush Limbaugh are among a disturbing number of conservatives who are calling for an all-out world war.
These conservatives have an insatiable appetite for conflict and a maniacal desire to try all 31 flavors war. They want to use events in the Mideast as an excuse to invade any country whose citizens dare to call God "Allah." But their calls for a wider war are not the result of some warped idea that the sound of rockets pounding in neighborhoods will lull the hate to sleep. Nope. They. Just. Want. War.
I offer for your morning enjoyment a serving of pure, unfiltered truth about the neocons who have been calling for a wider war. From Wednesday's Hardball episode, here is Chris Matthews taking them on:
MATTHEWS: I just wonder, Pat, about just the simple history. We know from looking at the Arab world as we've come to understand it, that there is this division there among the Shia who are on the outs and are becoming to be the ins, of course, in Iraq and certainly already control Iran. Taking on the Sunnis that's a world we are only vaguely understanding. That's a thousand year old war. Do you think we are creating another thousand year war by killing so many Arabs? I've been afraid of this war from day one because I've always felt, based on history, every time you kill somebody, you've got his brother, his mother, his family coming back to get you. We've killed 50,000 Iraqi's in a war that was supposed to be a two-day wonder. When are we going to notice that the neocons don't know what they're talking about. They're not looking at this country's long term interest. They're bound up in regional and global ideology and they have had no experience, I'll say it again, in even a school yard fight. They don't know what physical fighting is all about. They went to school and were intellectuals but they want our government to be their big brother. I don't get it. I don't know why we keep falling for it. And the president, you say, is he free of these guys or not?
And from Pat Buchanan:
Are these people nuts? You've got to ask yourself. I certainly hope the president is not listening to them because I really question whether they've got America's national interest at heart. They're calling for wars against people that never attacked us. I don't care how bad they are. There are wicked people all over this world but you don't go after people unless they come after you.
by georgia10
Fri Jul 21, 2006 at 07:04:02 AM PDT
I have a love-hate relationship with Chris Matthews. OK, it's mostly a hate relationship, in that I hate his documented record of being so misleading and so fundamentally wrong on so many issues.
But, I must give credit where credit is due. In those rare occasions where Matthews gets it right, he hits it out of the ballpark.
As Hunter pointed out, Newt Gingrich, Bill O'Reilly, Bill Kristol, Rich Lowry, and Rush Limbaugh are among a disturbing number of conservatives who are calling for an all-out world war.
These conservatives have an insatiable appetite for conflict and a maniacal desire to try all 31 flavors war. They want to use events in the Mideast as an excuse to invade any country whose citizens dare to call God "Allah." But their calls for a wider war are not the result of some warped idea that the sound of rockets pounding in neighborhoods will lull the hate to sleep. Nope. They. Just. Want. War.
I offer for your morning enjoyment a serving of pure, unfiltered truth about the neocons who have been calling for a wider war. From Wednesday's Hardball episode, here is Chris Matthews taking them on:
MATTHEWS: I just wonder, Pat, about just the simple history. We know from looking at the Arab world as we've come to understand it, that there is this division there among the Shia who are on the outs and are becoming to be the ins, of course, in Iraq and certainly already control Iran. Taking on the Sunnis that's a world we are only vaguely understanding. That's a thousand year old war. Do you think we are creating another thousand year war by killing so many Arabs? I've been afraid of this war from day one because I've always felt, based on history, every time you kill somebody, you've got his brother, his mother, his family coming back to get you. We've killed 50,000 Iraqi's in a war that was supposed to be a two-day wonder. When are we going to notice that the neocons don't know what they're talking about. They're not looking at this country's long term interest. They're bound up in regional and global ideology and they have had no experience, I'll say it again, in even a school yard fight. They don't know what physical fighting is all about. They went to school and were intellectuals but they want our government to be their big brother. I don't get it. I don't know why we keep falling for it. And the president, you say, is he free of these guys or not?
And from Pat Buchanan:
Are these people nuts? You've got to ask yourself. I certainly hope the president is not listening to them because I really question whether they've got America's national interest at heart. They're calling for wars against people that never attacked us. I don't care how bad they are. There are wicked people all over this world but you don't go after people unless they come after you.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
And yet
Another person who knew nothing of my nascent employment today - something I've known about for nearly two months, maybe three, have been talking about (but only to people who interview me for what is happening in my life, instead of expecting a monologue.)
Good lord, though, the office is going to be in Del Lago. It's a gorgeous place, but ..can you imagine? Up the beltway to I-45 and THEN, the drive JUST gets started. Six bucks in tolls a day, and about 100 miles a day in driving. But, it's very exciting.
I learned so much today - why cell phones are called "cell," what GSM stands for, how GSM works, how TDMA works, how GDMA works, how CDMA works (it's really the best system,) and much more. It was a great meeting.
But, I left the house at 6:45 a.m. (as Guy said .. "are the roads even open at that hour?") And got home at 8:00 ON a conference call for NV, which lasted until 9:00. So, I'm out of meds, I'm out of food, didn't have time to pick something up, and have to leave the house tomorrow at 7:45 AFTER printing up a bunch of material, which has to be copied and pasted into a word document, because what I printed off the website last night was unreadable.
I just wanted to hop into the pool. I had this notion of coming home, pouring a jug o'wine into my enormous glass, and nattering with Brambo - who was to be coming home from work at 8:00. HAH! I said "8:00? You mean 10:00." Even my cynical estimate was off by at least two hours.
This office building that we met in today; oof! One walks into the lobby, and it's .. lavish. With a bullet-proof reception area. Continental Airlines has built their disaster recovery center in there - which I caught a glimpse of today. Excellent stuff.
I've run through two phone battery charges today (a two hour conference call will do that for you) and driven just over 100 miles. I was out of bed at 5:30, and will repeat THAT little trick in the morning.
(sigh) Lovely stuff, eh?
Had a phone call from Babs today - but, can't call her back until Monday.
Talked to my Dad today; yurg. What a happy guy. He's going to spend the weekend with his sisters, which should be like the Chinese Water Torture. Let me rephrase that - it should be like the Relentless Chinese Water Torture.
Tom's back in circulation, Chuck's been busy as a bee, and I think I may have some time to myself on Monday after six. SAM hasn't responded to my email from last night, which is par for the course. I think I may be headed off to Korea for a few days (if I play my cards right) and that could be WAY fun, plus give me non-stop OnePass miles.
Who knows? We'll see where this all leads.
I need some sleep. And a shower. Or a shower and some sleep.
Tomorrow's coffee conversation in church is going to be about Peak Oil. That should be fun. I'll whip everyone into a froth and them smooth them out like a big ol' latte.
Good lord, though, the office is going to be in Del Lago. It's a gorgeous place, but ..can you imagine? Up the beltway to I-45 and THEN, the drive JUST gets started. Six bucks in tolls a day, and about 100 miles a day in driving. But, it's very exciting.
I learned so much today - why cell phones are called "cell," what GSM stands for, how GSM works, how TDMA works, how GDMA works, how CDMA works (it's really the best system,) and much more. It was a great meeting.
But, I left the house at 6:45 a.m. (as Guy said .. "are the roads even open at that hour?") And got home at 8:00 ON a conference call for NV, which lasted until 9:00. So, I'm out of meds, I'm out of food, didn't have time to pick something up, and have to leave the house tomorrow at 7:45 AFTER printing up a bunch of material, which has to be copied and pasted into a word document, because what I printed off the website last night was unreadable.
I just wanted to hop into the pool. I had this notion of coming home, pouring a jug o'wine into my enormous glass, and nattering with Brambo - who was to be coming home from work at 8:00. HAH! I said "8:00? You mean 10:00." Even my cynical estimate was off by at least two hours.
This office building that we met in today; oof! One walks into the lobby, and it's .. lavish. With a bullet-proof reception area. Continental Airlines has built their disaster recovery center in there - which I caught a glimpse of today. Excellent stuff.
I've run through two phone battery charges today (a two hour conference call will do that for you) and driven just over 100 miles. I was out of bed at 5:30, and will repeat THAT little trick in the morning.
(sigh) Lovely stuff, eh?
Had a phone call from Babs today - but, can't call her back until Monday.
Talked to my Dad today; yurg. What a happy guy. He's going to spend the weekend with his sisters, which should be like the Chinese Water Torture. Let me rephrase that - it should be like the Relentless Chinese Water Torture.
Tom's back in circulation, Chuck's been busy as a bee, and I think I may have some time to myself on Monday after six. SAM hasn't responded to my email from last night, which is par for the course. I think I may be headed off to Korea for a few days (if I play my cards right) and that could be WAY fun, plus give me non-stop OnePass miles.
Who knows? We'll see where this all leads.
I need some sleep. And a shower. Or a shower and some sleep.
Tomorrow's coffee conversation in church is going to be about Peak Oil. That should be fun. I'll whip everyone into a froth and them smooth them out like a big ol' latte.
Excellent humor about the stem cell veto
From Daily Kos
by Bill in Portland Maine
Thu Jul 20, 2006 at 05:04:56 AM PDT
From the Blastocyst Community Bulletin...
There will be a new blastocyst orientation session at the Federal Building on Market Street at 2pm (use the side door). All blastocysts will receive a Social Security number, $50 cash and a free copy of the Employment Times.
-
The annual Blastocyst pancake supper will be held at the Grange Hall Sunday from 6am `til 11am. Cost is $5 ($3 for embryoblasts 8 days and under). Because of last year's maple syrup disaster, powdered sugar will be substituted.
-
FOR SALE---framed portrait of President Bush signing the Blastocyst Civil Rights Act of 2006. Autographed on back by Sen. Brownback. $10 + s&h. 555-1323.
-
All of us at BCB mourn the passing of associate editor Hank Grindle, 12 days, a long-standing member of the local blastocyst community for 7 days and 3 hours. In lieu of flowers, contributions can be made to the VFW. Our condolences to Gladys, his wife of 10 days and 8 hours.
-
BLASTOCYST ROOMMATE wanted to share 2-bedroom apartment on west end. $575 + utilities. Non-smoker preferred. Pets negotiable. No vacuum cleaners. 555-3421.
-
BLASTAEROBICS! Come move and groove to a hip-hop beat at Marcy's Gym. Great way to make friends while increasing your lifespan by up to 36 hours! You'll have a BLAST! 555-MOVEIT.
-
FOR SALE: Petri dish. 4-inch diameter, like new. Only used by my grandmother on Sunday. $10 or best offer. 555-9845.
-
Feeling small? Join the Dale Carnegie blastocyst support group. Professional moderator helps you speak with confidence and raise self-esteem. Stay afterward for free résumé-building workshop.
by Bill in Portland Maine
Thu Jul 20, 2006 at 05:04:56 AM PDT
From the Blastocyst Community Bulletin...
There will be a new blastocyst orientation session at the Federal Building on Market Street at 2pm (use the side door). All blastocysts will receive a Social Security number, $50 cash and a free copy of the Employment Times.
-
The annual Blastocyst pancake supper will be held at the Grange Hall Sunday from 6am `til 11am. Cost is $5 ($3 for embryoblasts 8 days and under). Because of last year's maple syrup disaster, powdered sugar will be substituted.
-
FOR SALE---framed portrait of President Bush signing the Blastocyst Civil Rights Act of 2006. Autographed on back by Sen. Brownback. $10 + s&h. 555-1323.
-
All of us at BCB mourn the passing of associate editor Hank Grindle, 12 days, a long-standing member of the local blastocyst community for 7 days and 3 hours. In lieu of flowers, contributions can be made to the VFW. Our condolences to Gladys, his wife of 10 days and 8 hours.
-
BLASTOCYST ROOMMATE wanted to share 2-bedroom apartment on west end. $575 + utilities. Non-smoker preferred. Pets negotiable. No vacuum cleaners. 555-3421.
-
BLASTAEROBICS! Come move and groove to a hip-hop beat at Marcy's Gym. Great way to make friends while increasing your lifespan by up to 36 hours! You'll have a BLAST! 555-MOVEIT.
-
FOR SALE: Petri dish. 4-inch diameter, like new. Only used by my grandmother on Sunday. $10 or best offer. 555-9845.
-
Feeling small? Join the Dale Carnegie blastocyst support group. Professional moderator helps you speak with confidence and raise self-esteem. Stay afterward for free résumé-building workshop.
Ah, I'm gonna make you read today
From Daily Kos
This is a synopsis of the peak oil concept and the data/science behind it. It's very well written, and it's not screechy. I hope you take the time to read it and understand this likely very important possibility.
The Coming Oil Crisis
by Land of Lincoln Dem
Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 07:47:17 PM PDT
I know, I know, it's much easier to just ignore this problem. But life in the 21st century is never short on reminders that we exist in a world of ever-increasing energy needs in which our economy's growth and even its most basic vitality is almost directly tied to our access to a few precious commodities. Petroleum is necessary to continue our current lifestyle and yet our ability to obtain it in the quantities we need becomes less and less certain with each passing day. While there are a number of environmental and climate-related issues tied to the use of this fuel, I won't attempt to address those problems here and they must be reserved for another diary. This entry will be limited to the potential availability of petroleum sources in the near future as well as some of the geopolitical problems stemming from this possible shortage in the long run.
So join me on the flip side for a little history, a little analysis and a lot of "wonk" to find out just what kind of mess we're in...
* Land of Lincoln Dem's diary :: ::
*
Normally, I'm content to be a lurker on the site. Occasionally I'll post comments but for the most part I just enjoy having so much information on so many topics all in one place. Its like my very own condensed, Reader's Digest index of all human knowledge. But today I've decided to jump into the pool (don't worry, I won't pee in it) and share some of my knowledge on the global petroleum situation, because I've had the pleasure of reading several books and articles on the subject lately and feel I can contribute something to the community. Jerome a Paris is usually right on the mark with his diaries on oil and while I don't want to step on any toes, I'll give this a shot. (Note: this post ended up being rather epic in length so read ahead at your own risk)
It would not be an overstatement to describe oil as the lifeblood of our economy. In fact, it is almost impossible for the average person to imagine life without it. From the cars, trains and buses we take to work and school to the airplanes and trucks that carry goods from distant markets to our local store shelves it is essential to the post-industrialized lifestyle. It provides 40% of the world's total energy needs and more than 90% of the energy we need for transportation comes from oil. But oil is a finite resource. There is only so much of it in the world and when it runs out there is no way for us to acquire more of it. However, severe complications will arise long before we run the earth dry of oil.
For those unfamiliar, M. King Hubbert was a brilliant geologist working for the Shell Research lab in the 1950's and 1960's. Through his hard work and research he predicted in 1969 that worldwide oil production would peak around the year 2000. He didn't mean by any stretch of the imagination that we would run out of oil by that date. But he showed that production, when graphed, looked basically like a standard bell curve. In essence, he demonstrated that once approximately half the supply of earth's oil had been pumped, production would be at as high a level as it would ever be. Skeptics have noted that you can never truly know how much oil there ever was. And people probably would have long ago dismissed his calculations as the ranting of a pessimistic madman except for the trivial matter that he accurately predicted in 1956 that oil production in the United States would peak in the early 1970's.
Even today most people are unfamiliar with both Hubbert and his predictions even though his work is probably more important to us now that ever before. The question is not if production will one day peak but when. It is a forgone conclusion, even to those optimists who believe that we have decades until the fun stops, that one day the worldwide production of oil will reach a peak output and then begin to uncontrollably decline. Many believe that once we reach the peak it will be far too late to do anything. Without a plan in place to transition from oil to another fuel that will satisfy our transportation energy needs we run the risk of an economic collapse from a lack of foresight.
The misleading perception associated with "Hubbert's Peak" is the image evoked by the gentle downward slope of a bell curve. But the landing connected with a decline will be anything but soft. It is theoretically true that if a peak occurred this year - not entirely out of the question according to so some - a Hubbert-style graph shows that it would take about 15 years for production to drop 10%. But that is assuming worldwide growth and demand remain constant during that period of time. China and India's markets are developing exponentially and their rate of industrialization is pushing demand for oil higher everyday. And that is to say nothing about the growing U.S. population and ever-expanding economy complete with SUVs that rival the size of some houses.
If we were faced today with a peak in oil production there is little chance of limiting consumption in the short-term. We are simply too reliant on oil to give it up cold turkey. The higher prices linked to shrinking supplies would send oil companies scurrying to squeeze as much petroleum as possible from the earth in as short a period as possible. The extensive search for oil would be analogous to what was seen in the United States after domestic production topped out in 1970. A drilling boom would ensue in an attempt to satisfy the unquenchable demand. For a while they might even be successful in supplying what is needed to keep everything humming along. Instead of a peak in production with an anticipated decline there would be a plateau of sorts. This would ease fears and return things (relatively) to normal. The news cycle would end, coverage would shift to the next celebrity couple's baby news and people would be relieved to know that we solved the problem by simply drilling more wells.
There remains, however, the pesky matter of oil still being a finite resource. By changing the production curve we will have merely delayed the inevitable and accelerated the ensuing decline when new drilling begins to taper off and can no longer support current demand (assuming that it could meet that demand in the first place). The plateau will work temporarily but as one geologist put it, "the edge of a plateau looks a lot like a cliff." It is entirely possible that we are currently on such a plateau and we don't even realize it. In a few years we may look in the rear-view mirror and see that we have driven right off the edge without even knowing it, at which time it will be too late to do anything.
So if the experts believe that we are on the verge of reaching our peak for worldwide production capability (or if we have already hit it) what should be made of all the hype surrounding the "proven reserves" of so many nations, most notably those in the Middle East? Part of the problem is that for all its importance in today's world very few are privileged enough to be an insider in the oil industry with access to information regarding the availability of this valued product.
Matthew Simmons is one of those lucky few. He is a Houston-based investment banker who specializes in the energy industry. If there is anyone who has a desire to see things continue down the road of "business as usual" in the oil industry it would be someone who makes a living off having a financial interest in the industry. But Simmons has reached conclusions that all Americans should be afraid of. His fascinating book, Twilight in the Desert, details how little the public and even well informed insiders know about oil production. His work focuses on the secrecy of Saudi Arabia, the world's leading producer of oil, and how this secrecy has led to a flawed feeling of complacency. While he has his critics, Simmons is not some partisan political hack looking to score cheap points.
In 1979, a report released by the United States Senate showed that officials from Aramco - Saudi Arabia's national oil company - estimated their reserves to be in the neighborhood of 110 billion barrels of oil. Reserves are essentially oil fields that have been discovered but not tapped. These figures are difficult to approximate and sometimes on the conservative side so it didn't come as a huge shock when the Saudis revised the number to 150 billion barrels later that year. However, many observers were left scratching their heads when the numbers were further revised to 250 billion barrels of oil in reserve in 1988 even though no significant discoveries had been disclosed during that time. To this day, more than 17 years after those revisions, the official number stands at over 250 billion barrels of oil in "proven" reserves even though, again, no discoveries have been released to support that kind of increase over the 1979 figures. Also, Saudi Arabia has pumped nearly 50 billion barrels of oil out of the ground since 1988 while reserves have remained unchanged. They are unwilling to open any of their fields to independent verification and this lack of transparency is what worries many experts. What could they be hiding? Is there an incentive for them to lie or deceive?
Historically, the only time that reserve estimates are updated is if new discoveries are confirmed or new technology would allow a county or company to squeeze more oil out of existing fields. However, neither of these situations applied to Saudi Arabia or virtually any other oil producer who revised estimates during the 80's. The motivation for these adjustments was purely economic. In 1985 OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Counties) decreed that the higher one's stated reserves were the more oil you would be allowed to export. So while OPEC members claimed to be correcting for past mistakes they were really seeking higher revenue streams. This accounts for why the six OPEC member nations collectively doubled their "reserves" virtually overnight to more than 600 billion barrels and have kept them there ever since.
Even if we set aside the dire predictions of an imminent production peak and assume that we can continue down the current path indefinitely there are a number of short-term issues that have to be addressed. The principal nuisance is that even though demand will be increasing at least incrementally in the near future it appears production will not be able to meet that need. As mentioned before, nations other than our own have developed a growing addition to oil. If we could just pump and refine more of it we might be fine. But worldwide there is no longer any surplus production capacity. By 1997 Saudi Arabia was the last remaining nation with the luxury of holding back supply and even the great oil king had to admit the inescapable fact that by the Spring of 2003 they were maxed out themselves.
Since that time the price for a barrel of oil has gradually increased from about $28 to the nearly $80 we see today! The slightest hitch in production, or sometimes just the rumor of a potential hitch, can send the price fluctuating wildly. And of course, that's not even taking into account the latest turmoil in the Middle East. According to one observer, "Volatility has become the new market reality." It has become accepted fact that prices will be unstable and we all have to live with it. But many can't afford such a situation. Increasingly we are seeing more and more people falling into "energy poverty" which, in the 21st century, may be the greatest determining factor between the haves and have-nots.
Not everyone is concerned with the present state of affairs and how it may jeopardize our future. There are a growing number of people who feel that free market forces will help correct any shortcomings stemming from the oil industry. They are convinced that the problem is less geological than it is financial. Investment is merely in a lag behind the large growth in demand from the last decade or so.
There is a serious flaw, though, in this thinking. Investment rarely lags this far behind record profits, which the industry has been experiencing for some time. We should be seeing an explosion of capital being infused in an attempt to boost production and refining capability. Instead, we are seeing old oil tankers being retired quicker than the new ones are coming online and only a minimal increase in exploration budgets for the largest oil companies and producer nations.
So why would investment not keep up with demand? Is it possible that investors have access to hard evidence that the rest of public does not? Perhaps, but it is just as likely that they are drawing their conclusions from easily obtainable information and have decided that a peak in production is likely imminent. This would prevent them from securing a reasonable return on their investment, which is not good business sense. While it may be speculation to think investors anticipate a peak, it is an economic reality that investments are indiscriminate. If they thought there was money to be made in the future oil game there would undoubtedly be more investing than we are currently seeing.
There is another problem with the logic of the free market supporters and it has to do with their theoretical solution to the crisis. Alan Greenspan is one of the leaders of this philosophy and his explanation for what will happen in the face of higher oil prices is remarkably simple. He - and many others - argue that government intervention is not only unnecessary but undesirable. The market, through higher prices, will encourage the changes that are needed and we will gradually ease off of oil and onto something more stable and abundant. Government would only get in the way.
Not being an economist, this writer is reluctant to try and find fault in the economic theory proposed by Mr. Greenspan. However, there is a critical error with this basic premise that can get lost in the particulars. This viewpoint only works under the assumption of stable, established price levels. As we have seen recently oil is far too fickle a commodity to play along with this assertion. The past has also shown this to be an unlikely scenario. History tells us that conversions to new energy sources have been somewhat cumbersome. "The leaps from wood to coal and from coal to oil caused economic disruption and political uncertainty," according to Paul Roberts. "And these were fairly slow-motion transitions, occurring over several decades." There is simply no reason to believe that a current disaster could be handled smoothly by capitalism. The market is inherently too static to evolve at the rate in which we would need it to. The only solution is some form of government commitment, and even immediate action may be too late.
There is another variable in this equation that has not been mentioned directly but was alluded to earlier. The wildcard in all of this may be population and its overall rate of growth. In 1979 we reached the peak for per capita oil production, meaning that since then population has been growing faster than we have been able to find and pump oil. India and China were referenced to before as examples of newly industrializing countries that will only increase their oil needs. Within a generation or two their economies may rival or even exceed that of the United States' and it is not implausible to think they would consider using this increased influence to take actions that would be detrimental to our interests.
The bottom line is that soon there will be - or already are - too many people competing for too few resources. For many, oil has become as valuable to survival as water with no discernable end in sight. Our impromptu experiment to determine the earth's carrying capacity will not have a happy ending. Worldwide population control is often an unpleasant and no doubt controversial topic but it pales in comparison to the kind of ugliness Mother Nature would wreak upon us if this unchecked growth were allowed to continue. Famines, suffering and international volatility will only further destabilize the geopolitical balance of the world.
If indeed all of the evidence pointing toward the peak of oil production turns out to be true, what comes next? A worst-case scenario would have supplies falling fast enough to cause chaos and disruption the likes of few alive have ever seen. Panic would ensue as mankind tries to figure out what the new definition of "sustainable" is. Resource and energy wars would break out as the haves make a last ditch attempt to continue their lifestyle at the expense of the have-nots. But, of course, it doesn't have to happen that way. It may end up that oil supplies are adequate enough to delay "Hubbert's Peak" for a decade or more. In that case we have an unprecedented opportunity to reshape our society with the time we have left. The realization that we are on a collision course with fate has begun to sink in but people at all levels of society need to be better informed. Through sustained, determined efforts we may one day break free from the shackles of our hydrocarbon dependence. In order for that to happen, though, we all need to understand the implications of what will occur if we continue life as we know it.
What will the energy economy of the future look like if it does not include oil? The United States currently consumes more than 20 million barrels of oil every day out of a worldwide production of 85 million barrels. More than half of our current appetite is imported and that amount jumps to nearly three-fourths being imported in 20 years if demand grows as expected. Replacing such amounts means either curbing our energy use or finding new sources of energy to exploit.
Neither option is very attractive to most Americans. The reality of the situation will, of course, dictate that a patchwork of energy alternatives will be required to fill the colossal role of oil in our world. And while conservation will not solve any of these problems that have been mentioned it, too, will be necessary in making the transition more bearable.
As we peer over the cliff into the endless abyss of a post-oil world we are sure to be faced with difficult questions. The uncertainty surrounding our cherished way of life will be difficult to contemplate. And it will be even more difficult to give up our lifestyle of excess. But the fact remains that we have been living on borrowed time for far too long and the consequences are stalking us relentlessly. Kenneth E. Boulding once stated:
Anyone who believes that exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.
We must embrace a sense of conservation with sincerity and shake off the mindset of unconstrained progress. This isn't a battle that can be won with weapons and military might (though many leaders in our government will undoubtedly try). We will only prevail when our society remembers the noble foundations of deferred gratification, sacrifice, and sustained national effort that once drove this great nation.
Here are some of the books and articles that I found the most interesting during my formal and informal research:
Twilight in the Desert by Matthew Simmons
Beyond Oil: The View from Hubbert's Peak by Kenneth Deffeyes
The End of Oil: On the Edge of a Perilous New World by Paul Roberts
National Geographic's article The End of Cheap Oil
This is a synopsis of the peak oil concept and the data/science behind it. It's very well written, and it's not screechy. I hope you take the time to read it and understand this likely very important possibility.
The Coming Oil Crisis
by Land of Lincoln Dem
Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 07:47:17 PM PDT
I know, I know, it's much easier to just ignore this problem. But life in the 21st century is never short on reminders that we exist in a world of ever-increasing energy needs in which our economy's growth and even its most basic vitality is almost directly tied to our access to a few precious commodities. Petroleum is necessary to continue our current lifestyle and yet our ability to obtain it in the quantities we need becomes less and less certain with each passing day. While there are a number of environmental and climate-related issues tied to the use of this fuel, I won't attempt to address those problems here and they must be reserved for another diary. This entry will be limited to the potential availability of petroleum sources in the near future as well as some of the geopolitical problems stemming from this possible shortage in the long run.
So join me on the flip side for a little history, a little analysis and a lot of "wonk" to find out just what kind of mess we're in...
* Land of Lincoln Dem's diary :: ::
*
Normally, I'm content to be a lurker on the site. Occasionally I'll post comments but for the most part I just enjoy having so much information on so many topics all in one place. Its like my very own condensed, Reader's Digest index of all human knowledge. But today I've decided to jump into the pool (don't worry, I won't pee in it) and share some of my knowledge on the global petroleum situation, because I've had the pleasure of reading several books and articles on the subject lately and feel I can contribute something to the community. Jerome a Paris is usually right on the mark with his diaries on oil and while I don't want to step on any toes, I'll give this a shot. (Note: this post ended up being rather epic in length so read ahead at your own risk)
It would not be an overstatement to describe oil as the lifeblood of our economy. In fact, it is almost impossible for the average person to imagine life without it. From the cars, trains and buses we take to work and school to the airplanes and trucks that carry goods from distant markets to our local store shelves it is essential to the post-industrialized lifestyle. It provides 40% of the world's total energy needs and more than 90% of the energy we need for transportation comes from oil. But oil is a finite resource. There is only so much of it in the world and when it runs out there is no way for us to acquire more of it. However, severe complications will arise long before we run the earth dry of oil.
For those unfamiliar, M. King Hubbert was a brilliant geologist working for the Shell Research lab in the 1950's and 1960's. Through his hard work and research he predicted in 1969 that worldwide oil production would peak around the year 2000. He didn't mean by any stretch of the imagination that we would run out of oil by that date. But he showed that production, when graphed, looked basically like a standard bell curve. In essence, he demonstrated that once approximately half the supply of earth's oil had been pumped, production would be at as high a level as it would ever be. Skeptics have noted that you can never truly know how much oil there ever was. And people probably would have long ago dismissed his calculations as the ranting of a pessimistic madman except for the trivial matter that he accurately predicted in 1956 that oil production in the United States would peak in the early 1970's.
Even today most people are unfamiliar with both Hubbert and his predictions even though his work is probably more important to us now that ever before. The question is not if production will one day peak but when. It is a forgone conclusion, even to those optimists who believe that we have decades until the fun stops, that one day the worldwide production of oil will reach a peak output and then begin to uncontrollably decline. Many believe that once we reach the peak it will be far too late to do anything. Without a plan in place to transition from oil to another fuel that will satisfy our transportation energy needs we run the risk of an economic collapse from a lack of foresight.
The misleading perception associated with "Hubbert's Peak" is the image evoked by the gentle downward slope of a bell curve. But the landing connected with a decline will be anything but soft. It is theoretically true that if a peak occurred this year - not entirely out of the question according to so some - a Hubbert-style graph shows that it would take about 15 years for production to drop 10%. But that is assuming worldwide growth and demand remain constant during that period of time. China and India's markets are developing exponentially and their rate of industrialization is pushing demand for oil higher everyday. And that is to say nothing about the growing U.S. population and ever-expanding economy complete with SUVs that rival the size of some houses.
If we were faced today with a peak in oil production there is little chance of limiting consumption in the short-term. We are simply too reliant on oil to give it up cold turkey. The higher prices linked to shrinking supplies would send oil companies scurrying to squeeze as much petroleum as possible from the earth in as short a period as possible. The extensive search for oil would be analogous to what was seen in the United States after domestic production topped out in 1970. A drilling boom would ensue in an attempt to satisfy the unquenchable demand. For a while they might even be successful in supplying what is needed to keep everything humming along. Instead of a peak in production with an anticipated decline there would be a plateau of sorts. This would ease fears and return things (relatively) to normal. The news cycle would end, coverage would shift to the next celebrity couple's baby news and people would be relieved to know that we solved the problem by simply drilling more wells.
There remains, however, the pesky matter of oil still being a finite resource. By changing the production curve we will have merely delayed the inevitable and accelerated the ensuing decline when new drilling begins to taper off and can no longer support current demand (assuming that it could meet that demand in the first place). The plateau will work temporarily but as one geologist put it, "the edge of a plateau looks a lot like a cliff." It is entirely possible that we are currently on such a plateau and we don't even realize it. In a few years we may look in the rear-view mirror and see that we have driven right off the edge without even knowing it, at which time it will be too late to do anything.
So if the experts believe that we are on the verge of reaching our peak for worldwide production capability (or if we have already hit it) what should be made of all the hype surrounding the "proven reserves" of so many nations, most notably those in the Middle East? Part of the problem is that for all its importance in today's world very few are privileged enough to be an insider in the oil industry with access to information regarding the availability of this valued product.
Matthew Simmons is one of those lucky few. He is a Houston-based investment banker who specializes in the energy industry. If there is anyone who has a desire to see things continue down the road of "business as usual" in the oil industry it would be someone who makes a living off having a financial interest in the industry. But Simmons has reached conclusions that all Americans should be afraid of. His fascinating book, Twilight in the Desert, details how little the public and even well informed insiders know about oil production. His work focuses on the secrecy of Saudi Arabia, the world's leading producer of oil, and how this secrecy has led to a flawed feeling of complacency. While he has his critics, Simmons is not some partisan political hack looking to score cheap points.
In 1979, a report released by the United States Senate showed that officials from Aramco - Saudi Arabia's national oil company - estimated their reserves to be in the neighborhood of 110 billion barrels of oil. Reserves are essentially oil fields that have been discovered but not tapped. These figures are difficult to approximate and sometimes on the conservative side so it didn't come as a huge shock when the Saudis revised the number to 150 billion barrels later that year. However, many observers were left scratching their heads when the numbers were further revised to 250 billion barrels of oil in reserve in 1988 even though no significant discoveries had been disclosed during that time. To this day, more than 17 years after those revisions, the official number stands at over 250 billion barrels of oil in "proven" reserves even though, again, no discoveries have been released to support that kind of increase over the 1979 figures. Also, Saudi Arabia has pumped nearly 50 billion barrels of oil out of the ground since 1988 while reserves have remained unchanged. They are unwilling to open any of their fields to independent verification and this lack of transparency is what worries many experts. What could they be hiding? Is there an incentive for them to lie or deceive?
Historically, the only time that reserve estimates are updated is if new discoveries are confirmed or new technology would allow a county or company to squeeze more oil out of existing fields. However, neither of these situations applied to Saudi Arabia or virtually any other oil producer who revised estimates during the 80's. The motivation for these adjustments was purely economic. In 1985 OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Counties) decreed that the higher one's stated reserves were the more oil you would be allowed to export. So while OPEC members claimed to be correcting for past mistakes they were really seeking higher revenue streams. This accounts for why the six OPEC member nations collectively doubled their "reserves" virtually overnight to more than 600 billion barrels and have kept them there ever since.
Even if we set aside the dire predictions of an imminent production peak and assume that we can continue down the current path indefinitely there are a number of short-term issues that have to be addressed. The principal nuisance is that even though demand will be increasing at least incrementally in the near future it appears production will not be able to meet that need. As mentioned before, nations other than our own have developed a growing addition to oil. If we could just pump and refine more of it we might be fine. But worldwide there is no longer any surplus production capacity. By 1997 Saudi Arabia was the last remaining nation with the luxury of holding back supply and even the great oil king had to admit the inescapable fact that by the Spring of 2003 they were maxed out themselves.
Since that time the price for a barrel of oil has gradually increased from about $28 to the nearly $80 we see today! The slightest hitch in production, or sometimes just the rumor of a potential hitch, can send the price fluctuating wildly. And of course, that's not even taking into account the latest turmoil in the Middle East. According to one observer, "Volatility has become the new market reality." It has become accepted fact that prices will be unstable and we all have to live with it. But many can't afford such a situation. Increasingly we are seeing more and more people falling into "energy poverty" which, in the 21st century, may be the greatest determining factor between the haves and have-nots.
Not everyone is concerned with the present state of affairs and how it may jeopardize our future. There are a growing number of people who feel that free market forces will help correct any shortcomings stemming from the oil industry. They are convinced that the problem is less geological than it is financial. Investment is merely in a lag behind the large growth in demand from the last decade or so.
There is a serious flaw, though, in this thinking. Investment rarely lags this far behind record profits, which the industry has been experiencing for some time. We should be seeing an explosion of capital being infused in an attempt to boost production and refining capability. Instead, we are seeing old oil tankers being retired quicker than the new ones are coming online and only a minimal increase in exploration budgets for the largest oil companies and producer nations.
So why would investment not keep up with demand? Is it possible that investors have access to hard evidence that the rest of public does not? Perhaps, but it is just as likely that they are drawing their conclusions from easily obtainable information and have decided that a peak in production is likely imminent. This would prevent them from securing a reasonable return on their investment, which is not good business sense. While it may be speculation to think investors anticipate a peak, it is an economic reality that investments are indiscriminate. If they thought there was money to be made in the future oil game there would undoubtedly be more investing than we are currently seeing.
There is another problem with the logic of the free market supporters and it has to do with their theoretical solution to the crisis. Alan Greenspan is one of the leaders of this philosophy and his explanation for what will happen in the face of higher oil prices is remarkably simple. He - and many others - argue that government intervention is not only unnecessary but undesirable. The market, through higher prices, will encourage the changes that are needed and we will gradually ease off of oil and onto something more stable and abundant. Government would only get in the way.
Not being an economist, this writer is reluctant to try and find fault in the economic theory proposed by Mr. Greenspan. However, there is a critical error with this basic premise that can get lost in the particulars. This viewpoint only works under the assumption of stable, established price levels. As we have seen recently oil is far too fickle a commodity to play along with this assertion. The past has also shown this to be an unlikely scenario. History tells us that conversions to new energy sources have been somewhat cumbersome. "The leaps from wood to coal and from coal to oil caused economic disruption and political uncertainty," according to Paul Roberts. "And these were fairly slow-motion transitions, occurring over several decades." There is simply no reason to believe that a current disaster could be handled smoothly by capitalism. The market is inherently too static to evolve at the rate in which we would need it to. The only solution is some form of government commitment, and even immediate action may be too late.
There is another variable in this equation that has not been mentioned directly but was alluded to earlier. The wildcard in all of this may be population and its overall rate of growth. In 1979 we reached the peak for per capita oil production, meaning that since then population has been growing faster than we have been able to find and pump oil. India and China were referenced to before as examples of newly industrializing countries that will only increase their oil needs. Within a generation or two their economies may rival or even exceed that of the United States' and it is not implausible to think they would consider using this increased influence to take actions that would be detrimental to our interests.
The bottom line is that soon there will be - or already are - too many people competing for too few resources. For many, oil has become as valuable to survival as water with no discernable end in sight. Our impromptu experiment to determine the earth's carrying capacity will not have a happy ending. Worldwide population control is often an unpleasant and no doubt controversial topic but it pales in comparison to the kind of ugliness Mother Nature would wreak upon us if this unchecked growth were allowed to continue. Famines, suffering and international volatility will only further destabilize the geopolitical balance of the world.
If indeed all of the evidence pointing toward the peak of oil production turns out to be true, what comes next? A worst-case scenario would have supplies falling fast enough to cause chaos and disruption the likes of few alive have ever seen. Panic would ensue as mankind tries to figure out what the new definition of "sustainable" is. Resource and energy wars would break out as the haves make a last ditch attempt to continue their lifestyle at the expense of the have-nots. But, of course, it doesn't have to happen that way. It may end up that oil supplies are adequate enough to delay "Hubbert's Peak" for a decade or more. In that case we have an unprecedented opportunity to reshape our society with the time we have left. The realization that we are on a collision course with fate has begun to sink in but people at all levels of society need to be better informed. Through sustained, determined efforts we may one day break free from the shackles of our hydrocarbon dependence. In order for that to happen, though, we all need to understand the implications of what will occur if we continue life as we know it.
What will the energy economy of the future look like if it does not include oil? The United States currently consumes more than 20 million barrels of oil every day out of a worldwide production of 85 million barrels. More than half of our current appetite is imported and that amount jumps to nearly three-fourths being imported in 20 years if demand grows as expected. Replacing such amounts means either curbing our energy use or finding new sources of energy to exploit.
Neither option is very attractive to most Americans. The reality of the situation will, of course, dictate that a patchwork of energy alternatives will be required to fill the colossal role of oil in our world. And while conservation will not solve any of these problems that have been mentioned it, too, will be necessary in making the transition more bearable.
As we peer over the cliff into the endless abyss of a post-oil world we are sure to be faced with difficult questions. The uncertainty surrounding our cherished way of life will be difficult to contemplate. And it will be even more difficult to give up our lifestyle of excess. But the fact remains that we have been living on borrowed time for far too long and the consequences are stalking us relentlessly. Kenneth E. Boulding once stated:
Anyone who believes that exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.
We must embrace a sense of conservation with sincerity and shake off the mindset of unconstrained progress. This isn't a battle that can be won with weapons and military might (though many leaders in our government will undoubtedly try). We will only prevail when our society remembers the noble foundations of deferred gratification, sacrifice, and sustained national effort that once drove this great nation.
Here are some of the books and articles that I found the most interesting during my formal and informal research:
Twilight in the Desert by Matthew Simmons
Beyond Oil: The View from Hubbert's Peak by Kenneth Deffeyes
The End of Oil: On the Edge of a Perilous New World by Paul Roberts
National Geographic's article The End of Cheap Oil
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
Tuesday progress
So, I'm thinking that Babs isn't coming back. Haven't heard from her in three days, haven't had a reply to my text message - so, I pretty much figure she's moved on.
Today, just to keep things interesting, I totally reorganized the office supply closet. Threw out a bunch of stuff, piled all of the unused computer stuff high in the bathroom on the counter.
Still have a TON of filing to do. But, I plan to re-organize all of the files, put away a bunch of files that are no longer used into boxes, create new files and a filing system for some clients, and add more organizational oompf.
Secret Agent Man came by today - he was talking to me about my air conditioner, how it was undersized, how it was a cheap brand, how .. it could all be improved .. it was just so butch.
Mikey seems to be upset with me. He's not talking. Interestingly, the realtor is ignoring me too - and the commercial lease deal that I brought him. Time to move on as far as that goes.
Have to be up EARLY tomorrow to drive to the Woodlands. Have to be there before 8:00; which means leaving here before 7:00. I'll be gone almost all day Friday and Saturday as well. Sunday, of course, is always jam packed. So, my next day of availability is Monday.
Today, just to keep things interesting, I totally reorganized the office supply closet. Threw out a bunch of stuff, piled all of the unused computer stuff high in the bathroom on the counter.
Still have a TON of filing to do. But, I plan to re-organize all of the files, put away a bunch of files that are no longer used into boxes, create new files and a filing system for some clients, and add more organizational oompf.
Secret Agent Man came by today - he was talking to me about my air conditioner, how it was undersized, how it was a cheap brand, how .. it could all be improved .. it was just so butch.
Mikey seems to be upset with me. He's not talking. Interestingly, the realtor is ignoring me too - and the commercial lease deal that I brought him. Time to move on as far as that goes.
Have to be up EARLY tomorrow to drive to the Woodlands. Have to be there before 8:00; which means leaving here before 7:00. I'll be gone almost all day Friday and Saturday as well. Sunday, of course, is always jam packed. So, my next day of availability is Monday.
Happy Hump Day that felt like Thursday
So, health insurance. Chuck, being healthy and under 40, gets about a hundred dollars a month. Me, being none of the above, gets $460/month, plus a $2500 deductible, or $8020 per year ASSUMING I have no major health issues. Every year. If I billed forty hours a week (which is radically unlikely) that would be $3.85/hour for health insurance for me.
I usually successfully bill only twenty hours/week, the rest of the time being unrecoverable, so it's more like $8.00/hour for health insurance.
And I thought the VW Phaeton was expensive at $3.00/mile.
I've been thinking about cars. I talked to Jayne last night, and she's expecting me to tell her today what it is that I want. Thus, I've been thinking.
1. When I drove the Lucerne, we barely made it out of the parking lot, and I thought "this is it."
2. When the one I ordered came in, even though it was covered in bird poo and dirt, I had tingles when I saw it
3. When I've been just letting an image of a new car come to me, that's what I see in the garage
4. Buick is giving one away
5. I didn't feel "this is it" when I was driving the 300C
6. The only car that's given me those sorts of feelings has been the Lucerne
So, I really do want a Lucerne CXS with nav and an XM radio. Black, please.
Two really fun things today -
First, in case you missed it, our gummint is CHARGING our citizens who are in Lebanon for their evacuation. They are required to either give over a signed, blank check - or sign a blank promissory note. Once the cost is determined, they'll be notified - as the check hits their bank.
However, to make the situation sillier - check this out. They're expecting the 23,000 US citizens who are NOT being accomodated today to .. wait for a phone call or check the Embassy's website. In a country with no electricity and no phone service, because the Israelis targeted civilian infrastructure.
Just to be clear - THIS IS A COMPLETELY REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION. The "liberals" have NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS BEHAVIOR. The "liberals" have NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING. The only party in power is the REPUBLICAN PARTY. The only people making decisions at all are the REPUBLICANS.
Glad you're not in Lebanon?
Just as a teaser - the woman who gave over the 2000 election to Geo. W. - the woman who was his state campaign chairperson, but also responsible for counting the Florida vote - the woman who is running to un-seat one of the few remaining Demos in the world - has advanced to Level Four of the Political Scandal Process (thanks to Justin Rood of TPM Muckraker for that cute distinction)
She's now a TARGET of Federal (Republican) prosecutors for illegal fundraising and taking bribes. As a FRESHMAN Representative from Sarasota.
And all of you who thought I was being unreasonable saying she was a cheat and a liar back in 2000 - what have you to say NOW?
I'm telling you - read the book "What's the Matter with Kansas?" After I posted this morning, I read some more of it, and was just overcome - I have so many friends who are mouthing the very same nonsense - that government is bad, etc., etc. No facts, just generalizations to back it up. Generalizations which were never empirically founded and have been empirically disproved, and yet which persist. Such as the "Welfare Queens in Cadillacs" nonsense that never existed, and "illegal aliens with free healthcare" crap.
Uh - check the beginning of the post. It ain't free. It ain't free ANYWHERE.
If you don't start reading, I'll start posting a synopsis.
I usually successfully bill only twenty hours/week, the rest of the time being unrecoverable, so it's more like $8.00/hour for health insurance.
And I thought the VW Phaeton was expensive at $3.00/mile.
I've been thinking about cars. I talked to Jayne last night, and she's expecting me to tell her today what it is that I want. Thus, I've been thinking.
1. When I drove the Lucerne, we barely made it out of the parking lot, and I thought "this is it."
2. When the one I ordered came in, even though it was covered in bird poo and dirt, I had tingles when I saw it
3. When I've been just letting an image of a new car come to me, that's what I see in the garage
4. Buick is giving one away
5. I didn't feel "this is it" when I was driving the 300C
6. The only car that's given me those sorts of feelings has been the Lucerne
So, I really do want a Lucerne CXS with nav and an XM radio. Black, please.
Two really fun things today -
First, in case you missed it, our gummint is CHARGING our citizens who are in Lebanon for their evacuation. They are required to either give over a signed, blank check - or sign a blank promissory note. Once the cost is determined, they'll be notified - as the check hits their bank.
However, to make the situation sillier - check this out. They're expecting the 23,000 US citizens who are NOT being accomodated today to .. wait for a phone call or check the Embassy's website. In a country with no electricity and no phone service, because the Israelis targeted civilian infrastructure.
Just to be clear - THIS IS A COMPLETELY REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION. The "liberals" have NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS BEHAVIOR. The "liberals" have NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING. The only party in power is the REPUBLICAN PARTY. The only people making decisions at all are the REPUBLICANS.
Glad you're not in Lebanon?
Just as a teaser - the woman who gave over the 2000 election to Geo. W. - the woman who was his state campaign chairperson, but also responsible for counting the Florida vote - the woman who is running to un-seat one of the few remaining Demos in the world - has advanced to Level Four of the Political Scandal Process (thanks to Justin Rood of TPM Muckraker for that cute distinction)
She's now a TARGET of Federal (Republican) prosecutors for illegal fundraising and taking bribes. As a FRESHMAN Representative from Sarasota.
And all of you who thought I was being unreasonable saying she was a cheat and a liar back in 2000 - what have you to say NOW?
I'm telling you - read the book "What's the Matter with Kansas?" After I posted this morning, I read some more of it, and was just overcome - I have so many friends who are mouthing the very same nonsense - that government is bad, etc., etc. No facts, just generalizations to back it up. Generalizations which were never empirically founded and have been empirically disproved, and yet which persist. Such as the "Welfare Queens in Cadillacs" nonsense that never existed, and "illegal aliens with free healthcare" crap.
Uh - check the beginning of the post. It ain't free. It ain't free ANYWHERE.
If you don't start reading, I'll start posting a synopsis.
If you've a grain of interest in what's been happening since the 1980s
You should read this book "What's the Matter with Kansas?"
This book details how the right wing "wingnuts" took over the Republican Party, how they're voting and behaving against their own interests, and how much of the last twenty-five years has been nothing but rolling back any regulation on industry, finance and the wealthy - and nothing but that. And, that it took the massive infusion of angry blue-collar and poor people to accomplish this.
It's a great book. Read it. If you believe that the church and state should be kept separate, if you believe that our Constitutional rights were a good thing, if you believe that your boss does not have your best interests at heart - you need to read it.
This book details how the right wing "wingnuts" took over the Republican Party, how they're voting and behaving against their own interests, and how much of the last twenty-five years has been nothing but rolling back any regulation on industry, finance and the wealthy - and nothing but that. And, that it took the massive infusion of angry blue-collar and poor people to accomplish this.
It's a great book. Read it. If you believe that the church and state should be kept separate, if you believe that our Constitutional rights were a good thing, if you believe that your boss does not have your best interests at heart - you need to read it.
There He Goes Again. Lieberman Supports GOP Port-o-rama
From Daily Kos
by mcjoan
Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 09:13:01 PM PDT
Via Sirota, news tonight that House Democrats have found troubling provisions in the Oman Free Trade Agreement scheduled for a vote Thursday.
In an explosive report tonight, top House Democrats discovered provisions in the controversial Oman Free Trade Agreement that would permit foreign ownership of U.S. ports and other key national security assets. . . . As Reuters reports, "Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat who serves on the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee, said the pact would allow companies such as Dubai Ports World to acquire U.S. port operations by establishing a shell company in Oman." Those provisions might also allow foreign ownership of other key national security assets, considering just after the recent Dubai Ports controversy, that country went ahead with plans to purchase a major U.S. defense contractor.
How does Lieberman fit into this picture?
Last month, lawmakers from both parties in the U.S. Senate joined hands to pass the Oman Free Trade Agreement - which is being pushed aggressively by the Bush administration and its largest corporate donors. Lawmakers ignored major labor, human rights and environmental objections to the pact put forward by more than 400 union, religious and consumer groups. Among those voting for the pact in the Senate were Mike DeWine (R-OH) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT), two Senators facing tough re-election bids who could face renewed criticism in their home states that they have sold out their constituents.
So criticizing the administration's conduct of the Iraq War imperils national security, but allowing foreign ownership of national security assets, including ports, is fine. As long as that's what the Bush administration wants, Lieberman is happy to oblige. Or maybe he's hedging his bets with Republicans back home.
by mcjoan
Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 09:13:01 PM PDT
Via Sirota, news tonight that House Democrats have found troubling provisions in the Oman Free Trade Agreement scheduled for a vote Thursday.
In an explosive report tonight, top House Democrats discovered provisions in the controversial Oman Free Trade Agreement that would permit foreign ownership of U.S. ports and other key national security assets. . . . As Reuters reports, "Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat who serves on the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee, said the pact would allow companies such as Dubai Ports World to acquire U.S. port operations by establishing a shell company in Oman." Those provisions might also allow foreign ownership of other key national security assets, considering just after the recent Dubai Ports controversy, that country went ahead with plans to purchase a major U.S. defense contractor.
How does Lieberman fit into this picture?
Last month, lawmakers from both parties in the U.S. Senate joined hands to pass the Oman Free Trade Agreement - which is being pushed aggressively by the Bush administration and its largest corporate donors. Lawmakers ignored major labor, human rights and environmental objections to the pact put forward by more than 400 union, religious and consumer groups. Among those voting for the pact in the Senate were Mike DeWine (R-OH) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT), two Senators facing tough re-election bids who could face renewed criticism in their home states that they have sold out their constituents.
So criticizing the administration's conduct of the Iraq War imperils national security, but allowing foreign ownership of national security assets, including ports, is fine. As long as that's what the Bush administration wants, Lieberman is happy to oblige. Or maybe he's hedging his bets with Republicans back home.
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Tuesday with my Jemima Mammy do-rag on
I've been cleaning all damned morning - I started by trying to open my mail from the last five days, which lead to clearing off the desk, followed by 20 minutes of shredding, which required bagging up the contents of the shredder, which necessitated swamping out the garbage can with bleach water. With other stuff in between. Now, we're about to have a thundershower. I have hours of work to do yet; I was working last night until 10:45. Still have six months' of a client's bank statements to reconcile, CellCast's files to go through and organize, my own filing to get caught up on, bills to pay (which requires money to pay them with,) a mortgage loan to work on, and a contract to review - as in, do I want to do this? Not to mention all the non-timelined, creative projects that are dragging on (Fabulair, SOM writings and on-line presentations, etc.)
Haircut, office supplies, pick up the mail, come back, fill up the water jugs, unload the car, answer email, and still I need to spend several hours doing substantive work.
I need to spend some time making some notes - I'm thinking that I'm going to heave it all into my Yahoo 360 site - books that I think are important, places that I REALLY want to visit, how I want my life to be. Maybe it needs to be in a private journal. Some of it.
I think that's tonight's work effort - a bit of visualization, while Brambo is at work.
Haircut, office supplies, pick up the mail, come back, fill up the water jugs, unload the car, answer email, and still I need to spend several hours doing substantive work.
I need to spend some time making some notes - I'm thinking that I'm going to heave it all into my Yahoo 360 site - books that I think are important, places that I REALLY want to visit, how I want my life to be. Maybe it needs to be in a private journal. Some of it.
I think that's tonight's work effort - a bit of visualization, while Brambo is at work.
Monday, July 17, 2006
Monday, Monday ver. 825.01
So much to write about today - I'll have to do it in steps. First, I'm now a licensed Religious Science Practitioner - I was accepted after my oral panel on Saturday. A five year process, including the basic courses necessary to be able to take practitioner level courses. Maybe six.
This morning, I was intent on cleaning up Ruby (the car.) She's been looking pretty rough, so I went to Wally World, returned some pool chemicals I've not used, bought gas and stopped at the coin-op car wash. Some fifteen minutes and two almost slip and falls later, she was passably clean. I brought her home, cleaned the windows, wiped down the exterior, and cleaned up the interior. She looks a lot better. I may just mount my giant Marvin the Martian sticker on her rear window today.
Last night, I had things I could have been doing, but I was just wiped out. I went to bed at 10:00, and slept until 7:00. Today, I'm feeling like I'm having my weekend, but I have to get cracking and produce some results here shortly. At least, I'm feeling perkier.
This week is going to be mostly wall-to-wall catching up (on behalf of clients, not that I'm all that far behind.) All organizing records and putting it into QuickBooks.
At the church, they got a Lasko floor mount blower that feel like an air conditioner; I found them at Sam's Club for $46. I'm going to run and get one shortly to help with the apparent temperature up here in the office.
Aside from that, just a load of work lined out to complete this week.
The class reunion is looking less and less likely. Saves me a bunch of money, of course, that's a good thing.
Tom's off in New Orleans until Wednesday; he'll be slutting around instead of working on websites .. GOOD FOR HIM! He's such a sweetie.
More later - this is what I can jot down for now.
This morning, I was intent on cleaning up Ruby (the car.) She's been looking pretty rough, so I went to Wally World, returned some pool chemicals I've not used, bought gas and stopped at the coin-op car wash. Some fifteen minutes and two almost slip and falls later, she was passably clean. I brought her home, cleaned the windows, wiped down the exterior, and cleaned up the interior. She looks a lot better. I may just mount my giant Marvin the Martian sticker on her rear window today.
Last night, I had things I could have been doing, but I was just wiped out. I went to bed at 10:00, and slept until 7:00. Today, I'm feeling like I'm having my weekend, but I have to get cracking and produce some results here shortly. At least, I'm feeling perkier.
This week is going to be mostly wall-to-wall catching up (on behalf of clients, not that I'm all that far behind.) All organizing records and putting it into QuickBooks.
At the church, they got a Lasko floor mount blower that feel like an air conditioner; I found them at Sam's Club for $46. I'm going to run and get one shortly to help with the apparent temperature up here in the office.
Aside from that, just a load of work lined out to complete this week.
The class reunion is looking less and less likely. Saves me a bunch of money, of course, that's a good thing.
Tom's off in New Orleans until Wednesday; he'll be slutting around instead of working on websites .. GOOD FOR HIM! He's such a sweetie.
More later - this is what I can jot down for now.
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Okay, so I've been laying off the political diatribe lately
For one thing, it was starting to bore me. For another, I figured that only someone who was dead could miss the level of corruption, lies and manipulation from which we are currently suffering. I don't know of anyone who's in FAVOR of any of these idiots. And, I mean Demos or Repugs.
But, this .. this was shocking. Here we have a quote from today's G8 conference in St. Petersburg, Russia:
From Daily Kos
From CNN, Bush urges the model of "Iraq democracy" on a what-must-be-assumed-to-be-astonished Vladimir Putin:
"I talked about my desire to promote institutional change in parts of the world, like Iraq where there's a free press and free religion, and I told him that a lot of people in our country would hope that Russia would do the same," Bush said.
But what CNN originally failed to point out was Bush's response. Here's the transcript from Think Progress, where you can also see the video of the exchange.
BUSH: I talked about my desire to promote institutional change in parts of the world, like Iraq, where there's a free press and free religion. And I told him that a lot of people in our country would hope that Russia will do the same thing. I fully understand, however, that there will be a Russian-style democracy.
PUTIN: We certainly would not want to have same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq, quite honestly.
BUSH: Just wait.
This from the man who sums up diplomacy with this gem: "Different words mean different things to different people." Someone please keep this man away from unscripted events. World peace might very well depend upon it.
Now, I ask you - if now isn't the time to take our country back, when is?
But, this .. this was shocking. Here we have a quote from today's G8 conference in St. Petersburg, Russia:
From Daily Kos
From CNN, Bush urges the model of "Iraq democracy" on a what-must-be-assumed-to-be-astonished Vladimir Putin:
"I talked about my desire to promote institutional change in parts of the world, like Iraq where there's a free press and free religion, and I told him that a lot of people in our country would hope that Russia would do the same," Bush said.
But what CNN originally failed to point out was Bush's response. Here's the transcript from Think Progress, where you can also see the video of the exchange.
BUSH: I talked about my desire to promote institutional change in parts of the world, like Iraq, where there's a free press and free religion. And I told him that a lot of people in our country would hope that Russia will do the same thing. I fully understand, however, that there will be a Russian-style democracy.
PUTIN: We certainly would not want to have same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq, quite honestly.
BUSH: Just wait.
This from the man who sums up diplomacy with this gem: "Different words mean different things to different people." Someone please keep this man away from unscripted events. World peace might very well depend upon it.
Now, I ask you - if now isn't the time to take our country back, when is?
The real danger to us from the Middle East
This morning, from a cave somewhere in Pakistan, Taliban Minister of Migration, Mohammed Omar, warned the United States that if military action against Iraq continues, Taliban authorities will cut off America's supply of convenience store managers. And if this action does not yield sufficient results, cab drivers will be next, followed by Dell customer service reps.
Friday, July 14, 2006
Fuzzy math
July 13, 2006, 8:12PM
From the Houston Chronicle
Slight decrease in the projected federal budget deficit offers little cause for celebration.
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle
SUPPOSE a physician infected 100 patients with malaria and subsequently cured seven of them. The healthy patients might be a testament to the doctor's restorative powers, but the entire exercise would not be edifying or praiseworthy.
A similar logic applies to claims about the wisdom to be seen in federal tax and spending decisions.
The federal budget deficit for fiscal 2005 was $318 billion. The White House projects that the deficit for 2006 will be $296 billion. Given the unrestrained spending that has characterized this Congress, Americans must be grateful the deficit is projected to be no higher. However, $296 billion, the fourth-highest deficit recorded in U.S. history, provides little cause to break open the champagne (or freedom wine, according to taste).
To its credit, the Republican Party's conservative base has begun to express outrage at Washington's irresponsible spending policies. Terrified of losing their base, President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress have seized upon the deficit figures as proof that they represent the party of fiscal responsibility. The lower deficit projection, Bush and House Majority Leader John Boehner say, results from tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003.
Voters, aware that the 2007 deficit is due to rise again to $318 billion, can decide how much credence to give that claim when they go to the polls in November. Whatever the case, the reduced budget figure for 2006 deserves to be seen in context.
In 2001, before the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the federal budget was in surplus. After the 2001 tax cuts and economic shock from 9/11, tax revenues declined in 2002-2003. Only in 2006 have tax revenues, adjusted for inflation and population growth, climbed higher than they were in 2000.
The truth is that when the United States' huge economy is healthy, tax revenues rise whether tax rates are raised, lowered or kept the same. Revenues rose when Ronald Reagan won tax cuts, and they rose when Bill Clinton secured tax hikes.
Tax cuts do spur economic activity and can help to lift the economy out of recession. But the administration's own Treasury Department analysis finds that tax cuts account for less than half of 1 percent of the economy's 3 percent-4 percent annual growth.
If tax cuts are spurring an economic boom, why is the federal budget still running a huge deficit after four years of solid economic expansion? The budget ought to be in surplus.
Furthermore, the budget figures do not take into account the hundreds of billions of dollars the nation will spend fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Following long custom, the administration has budgeted not a single dollar to pay for future combat operations, even in the middle of a global struggle against determined enemies.
As both Republicans and Democrats acknowledge, this year's $294 billion deficit estimate should be $180 billion higher to reflect the spending of every penny of the annual Social Security surplus the government collects from U.S. workers. That money should be used to buy down the national debt to prepare for the wave of baby boomer retirements, not squandered on bridges to nowhere and other so-called budget earmarks.
Democrats in Congress have their own large spending ambitions, but they have no hand in crafting the budget and are not even given a chance to read appropriations bills before a vote is taken.
In the last five years, federal spending has added $3 trillion to the national debt. Placed against that backdrop, a $12 billion drop in the federal deficit deserves no more than a polite nod of recognition.
From the Houston Chronicle
Slight decrease in the projected federal budget deficit offers little cause for celebration.
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle
SUPPOSE a physician infected 100 patients with malaria and subsequently cured seven of them. The healthy patients might be a testament to the doctor's restorative powers, but the entire exercise would not be edifying or praiseworthy.
A similar logic applies to claims about the wisdom to be seen in federal tax and spending decisions.
The federal budget deficit for fiscal 2005 was $318 billion. The White House projects that the deficit for 2006 will be $296 billion. Given the unrestrained spending that has characterized this Congress, Americans must be grateful the deficit is projected to be no higher. However, $296 billion, the fourth-highest deficit recorded in U.S. history, provides little cause to break open the champagne (or freedom wine, according to taste).
To its credit, the Republican Party's conservative base has begun to express outrage at Washington's irresponsible spending policies. Terrified of losing their base, President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress have seized upon the deficit figures as proof that they represent the party of fiscal responsibility. The lower deficit projection, Bush and House Majority Leader John Boehner say, results from tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003.
Voters, aware that the 2007 deficit is due to rise again to $318 billion, can decide how much credence to give that claim when they go to the polls in November. Whatever the case, the reduced budget figure for 2006 deserves to be seen in context.
In 2001, before the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the federal budget was in surplus. After the 2001 tax cuts and economic shock from 9/11, tax revenues declined in 2002-2003. Only in 2006 have tax revenues, adjusted for inflation and population growth, climbed higher than they were in 2000.
The truth is that when the United States' huge economy is healthy, tax revenues rise whether tax rates are raised, lowered or kept the same. Revenues rose when Ronald Reagan won tax cuts, and they rose when Bill Clinton secured tax hikes.
Tax cuts do spur economic activity and can help to lift the economy out of recession. But the administration's own Treasury Department analysis finds that tax cuts account for less than half of 1 percent of the economy's 3 percent-4 percent annual growth.
If tax cuts are spurring an economic boom, why is the federal budget still running a huge deficit after four years of solid economic expansion? The budget ought to be in surplus.
Furthermore, the budget figures do not take into account the hundreds of billions of dollars the nation will spend fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Following long custom, the administration has budgeted not a single dollar to pay for future combat operations, even in the middle of a global struggle against determined enemies.
As both Republicans and Democrats acknowledge, this year's $294 billion deficit estimate should be $180 billion higher to reflect the spending of every penny of the annual Social Security surplus the government collects from U.S. workers. That money should be used to buy down the national debt to prepare for the wave of baby boomer retirements, not squandered on bridges to nowhere and other so-called budget earmarks.
Democrats in Congress have their own large spending ambitions, but they have no hand in crafting the budget and are not even given a chance to read appropriations bills before a vote is taken.
In the last five years, federal spending has added $3 trillion to the national debt. Placed against that backdrop, a $12 billion drop in the federal deficit deserves no more than a polite nod of recognition.
Thursday, July 13, 2006
The first letter of mine that the Chronicle is likely to publish
On July 12, Bernie Bryl wrote to complain of the noise levels at Intercontinental Airport.
These complaints mystify me; Intercontinental Airport was built in the middle of undeveloped ranch and woodland almost forty years ago. There were no residential areas there, and the North Harris college campus that is mentioned was founded four years after Intercontinental Airport was opened.
Everyone who is complaining of the nuisance that Intercontinental Airport poses made a choice to be there, knowing that the airport was there first. Beginning in 1969, the airport has operated continuously at that location, and any development, residential, commercial or educational, knowingly established themselves underneath an airport's traffic pattern at a time when jet engine noise was many, many times louder than it is now.
These complaints are without merit, and should continue to be ignored by local, state and Federal government officials. Intercontinental Airport is a huge economic engine for our region, just as is the port. Strangling it to accommodate people who chose to be in harm's way makes no sense.
These complaints mystify me; Intercontinental Airport was built in the middle of undeveloped ranch and woodland almost forty years ago. There were no residential areas there, and the North Harris college campus that is mentioned was founded four years after Intercontinental Airport was opened.
Everyone who is complaining of the nuisance that Intercontinental Airport poses made a choice to be there, knowing that the airport was there first. Beginning in 1969, the airport has operated continuously at that location, and any development, residential, commercial or educational, knowingly established themselves underneath an airport's traffic pattern at a time when jet engine noise was many, many times louder than it is now.
These complaints are without merit, and should continue to be ignored by local, state and Federal government officials. Intercontinental Airport is a huge economic engine for our region, just as is the port. Strangling it to accommodate people who chose to be in harm's way makes no sense.
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Director of Irony
source article
Rahm Emanuel looks to save the nation $100K by doing the "Director of Lessons Learned" job for him:
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the President said we continue to be wise about how we spend the people's money.
"Then why are we paying over $100,000 for a 'White House Director of Lessons Learned'?
"Maybe I can save the taxpayers $100,000 by running through a few of the lessons this White House should have learned by now.
"Lesson 1: When the Army Chief of Staff and the Secretary of State say you are going to war without enough troops, you're going to war without enough troops.
"Lesson 2: When 8.8 billion dollars of reconstruction funding disappears from Iraq, and 2 billion dollars disappears from Katrina relief, it's time to demand a little accountability.
"Lesson 3: When you've 'turned the corner' in Iraq more times than Danica Patrick at the Indy 500, it means you are going in circles.
"Lesson 4: When the national weather service tells you a category 5 hurricane is heading for New Orleans, a category 5 hurricane is heading to New Orleans.
"I would also ask the President why we're paying for two 'Ethics Advisors' and a 'Director of Fact Checking.'
"They must be the only people in Washington who get more vacation time than the President.
"Maybe the White House could consolidate these positions into a Director of Irony."
Rahm Emanuel looks to save the nation $100K by doing the "Director of Lessons Learned" job for him:
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the President said we continue to be wise about how we spend the people's money.
"Then why are we paying over $100,000 for a 'White House Director of Lessons Learned'?
"Maybe I can save the taxpayers $100,000 by running through a few of the lessons this White House should have learned by now.
"Lesson 1: When the Army Chief of Staff and the Secretary of State say you are going to war without enough troops, you're going to war without enough troops.
"Lesson 2: When 8.8 billion dollars of reconstruction funding disappears from Iraq, and 2 billion dollars disappears from Katrina relief, it's time to demand a little accountability.
"Lesson 3: When you've 'turned the corner' in Iraq more times than Danica Patrick at the Indy 500, it means you are going in circles.
"Lesson 4: When the national weather service tells you a category 5 hurricane is heading for New Orleans, a category 5 hurricane is heading to New Orleans.
"I would also ask the President why we're paying for two 'Ethics Advisors' and a 'Director of Fact Checking.'
"They must be the only people in Washington who get more vacation time than the President.
"Maybe the White House could consolidate these positions into a Director of Irony."
Kids (from Maine) say the DARNDEST things...
The American flag stands for the fact that cloth can be very important. [...] You can tell just how important this cloth is because when you compare it to people, it gets much better treatment. Nobody cares if a homeless person touches the ground. A homeless person can lie all over the ground all night long without anyone picking him up, folding him neatly and sheltering him from the rain.
School children have to pledge loyalty to this piece of cloth every morning. No one has to pledge loyalty to justice and equality and human decency. No one has to promise that people will get a fair wage, or enough food to eat, or affordable medicine, or clean water, or air free of harmful chemicals. But we all have to promise to love a rectangle of red, white, and blue cloth.
Betsy Ross would be quite surprised to see how successful her creation has become. But Thomas Jefferson would be disappointed to see how little of the flag's real meaning remains.
Charlotte Aldebron, wrote that in '02 for a competition in her 6th grade English class while attending Cunningham Middle School in Presque Isle, Maine. Four years later, it seems even more relevant. (Hat tip to Nonie3234 for the link)
School children have to pledge loyalty to this piece of cloth every morning. No one has to pledge loyalty to justice and equality and human decency. No one has to promise that people will get a fair wage, or enough food to eat, or affordable medicine, or clean water, or air free of harmful chemicals. But we all have to promise to love a rectangle of red, white, and blue cloth.
Betsy Ross would be quite surprised to see how successful her creation has become. But Thomas Jefferson would be disappointed to see how little of the flag's real meaning remains.
Charlotte Aldebron, wrote that in '02 for a competition in her 6th grade English class while attending Cunningham Middle School in Presque Isle, Maine. Four years later, it seems even more relevant. (Hat tip to Nonie3234 for the link)
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Oh, yeah - tax cuts are responsible for the decrease
From Talking Points Memo
President Bush is out saying that his tax cuts are responsible for the deficit this year being lower than his economists predicted earlier this year and slightly lower than the actual deficit last year. But is someone going to mention that the tax cuts are the prime reason we have record deficits to begin with? President Bush came into office with surpluses. He ran up the deficits, structural deficits created by his tax cuts. Or have we forgotten that?
Late Update: There's a good editorial making this point in The New Republic a few weeks back. Unfortunately, it's behind their subscription wall. But I'll give you this snippet: "Halving a deficit you inherited would be something to brag about. Halving a deficit you created, not so much. You don't see Bush's former chief domestic policy adviser Claude Allen boasting that he has returned half the merchandise he filched from Target." And as the editors point out, this would be the case if the claim of reducing the deficit were true, which it turns out not to be. Oh well. News editor dorks who got taken in can seek absolution where?
President Bush is out saying that his tax cuts are responsible for the deficit this year being lower than his economists predicted earlier this year and slightly lower than the actual deficit last year. But is someone going to mention that the tax cuts are the prime reason we have record deficits to begin with? President Bush came into office with surpluses. He ran up the deficits, structural deficits created by his tax cuts. Or have we forgotten that?
Late Update: There's a good editorial making this point in The New Republic a few weeks back. Unfortunately, it's behind their subscription wall. But I'll give you this snippet: "Halving a deficit you inherited would be something to brag about. Halving a deficit you created, not so much. You don't see Bush's former chief domestic policy adviser Claude Allen boasting that he has returned half the merchandise he filched from Target." And as the editors point out, this would be the case if the claim of reducing the deficit were true, which it turns out not to be. Oh well. News editor dorks who got taken in can seek absolution where?
Who got raises at the White House?
From Daily Kos
Let's see who the White House values, and who it doesn't...
President Bush's most senior aides -- the ones who hold the coveted title of "assistant to the president" -- recently received a $4,200 cost-of-living bump-up in compensation and now earn a top pay rate of $165,200, according to an internal White House list of staff salaries. The list was compiled by the administration for the year that ended June 30 and is displayed both alphabetically, and by dollar ranking, below. Those at the bottom of the White House staff pay scale -- the folks answering phones and responding to the president's mail, for example -- remain stuck at last year's pay floor of $30,000, according to a year-to-year comparison of White House data obtained by National Journal.
Heh. Those at the bottom didn't even get scraps. A BIG ZERO pay raise.
And who is the decider of those salaries?
White House salaries and job titles are largely controlled at the discretion of the president.
Anyone surprised?
Republicanism in all its glory.
Meanwhile, Think Progress mocks the $106K+ paid to Stuart Baker for being -- this is no joke -- the Director for Lessons Learned. The two ethics advisors ($114.7K and $100.5K) and the Director of Fact Checking ($46.5K) are also clearly doing little to earn their salaries.
Let's see who the White House values, and who it doesn't...
President Bush's most senior aides -- the ones who hold the coveted title of "assistant to the president" -- recently received a $4,200 cost-of-living bump-up in compensation and now earn a top pay rate of $165,200, according to an internal White House list of staff salaries. The list was compiled by the administration for the year that ended June 30 and is displayed both alphabetically, and by dollar ranking, below. Those at the bottom of the White House staff pay scale -- the folks answering phones and responding to the president's mail, for example -- remain stuck at last year's pay floor of $30,000, according to a year-to-year comparison of White House data obtained by National Journal.
Heh. Those at the bottom didn't even get scraps. A BIG ZERO pay raise.
And who is the decider of those salaries?
White House salaries and job titles are largely controlled at the discretion of the president.
Anyone surprised?
Republicanism in all its glory.
Meanwhile, Think Progress mocks the $106K+ paid to Stuart Baker for being -- this is no joke -- the Director for Lessons Learned. The two ethics advisors ($114.7K and $100.5K) and the Director of Fact Checking ($46.5K) are also clearly doing little to earn their salaries.
Bush pleased with massive deficit
From Daily Kos
By kos on deficit
Bush wants high-fives all around for yet another massive budget deficit.
Today, the Office of Management Budget projected a $296 billion federal deficit for fiscal year 2006. Bush held a press conference arguing that this is a vindication of his economic policies.
Actually, it would be the fourth largest deficit of all time. Here's the top five:
1. 2004 (George W. Bush) $413 billion
2. 2003 (George W. Bush) $378 billion
3. 2005 (George W. Bush) $318 billion
4. 2006 (George W. Bush) $296 billion (projected)
5. 1992 (George H. W. Bush) $290 billion
When President Bush came into office, he inherited a surplus of $284 Billion. At that time, the Bush administration predicted a $516 billion surplus for 2006.
I remember when Republicans thought deficits were bad. Now they are celebrating them.
By kos on deficit
Bush wants high-fives all around for yet another massive budget deficit.
Today, the Office of Management Budget projected a $296 billion federal deficit for fiscal year 2006. Bush held a press conference arguing that this is a vindication of his economic policies.
Actually, it would be the fourth largest deficit of all time. Here's the top five:
1. 2004 (George W. Bush) $413 billion
2. 2003 (George W. Bush) $378 billion
3. 2005 (George W. Bush) $318 billion
4. 2006 (George W. Bush) $296 billion (projected)
5. 1992 (George H. W. Bush) $290 billion
When President Bush came into office, he inherited a surplus of $284 Billion. At that time, the Bush administration predicted a $516 billion surplus for 2006.
I remember when Republicans thought deficits were bad. Now they are celebrating them.
Monday, July 10, 2006
Monday, Monday ver. 824.01
Catching up after a lost week is a bit tough, especially when your motivation didn't come with the computer repair.
I'm about to re-do five tax returns, and then print them out for delivery. Very fun stuff.. then, it's time to work my booty off, in anticipation of delivery this course work TOMORROW. Yarg.
Tomorrow, I have to deliver all of my online content. I think I have it all designed, and know what I'm going to say.
And, I have about 1/3 of the materials already completed. So, up early to complete and send off the work, no IM and no email until it's all done.
Got a bunch done today; it's amazing what one can accomplish when the tax and mortgage software is working properly. Have tomorrow dedicated to the online course content, and then all the rest of the week reconstructing a client's books for the last two years. I like having work to do.
Ah, Bram's driving up. He's so excited that I could find the G35 like his to be the car for me. He keeps talking it up. Chuck and I are going tomorrow to look at one (and an FX35, also, which is Chuck's preference.) The G35 is stunning, though, and has a LOW stock number, which suggests that they've had it a while.
I'll stick up some pictures here in a second.
Secret Agent Man was suddenly back in touch today. Oof. That man, I swear.
I'm about to re-do five tax returns, and then print them out for delivery. Very fun stuff.. then, it's time to work my booty off, in anticipation of delivery this course work TOMORROW. Yarg.
Tomorrow, I have to deliver all of my online content. I think I have it all designed, and know what I'm going to say.
And, I have about 1/3 of the materials already completed. So, up early to complete and send off the work, no IM and no email until it's all done.
Got a bunch done today; it's amazing what one can accomplish when the tax and mortgage software is working properly. Have tomorrow dedicated to the online course content, and then all the rest of the week reconstructing a client's books for the last two years. I like having work to do.
Ah, Bram's driving up. He's so excited that I could find the G35 like his to be the car for me. He keeps talking it up. Chuck and I are going tomorrow to look at one (and an FX35, also, which is Chuck's preference.) The G35 is stunning, though, and has a LOW stock number, which suggests that they've had it a while.
I'll stick up some pictures here in a second.
Secret Agent Man was suddenly back in touch today. Oof. That man, I swear.
Sunday, July 09, 2006
Sunday - more rain, or .. is it clearing up?
It looks like it could be clearing up. Laundry is underway. I'm watching a VERY strange movie called "Tarnation," about a guy from Houston, and his growing up in foster homes, having a mother who is schizophrenic. The movie is a montage of pictures, video, super 8MM and answering machine messages. It's .. um .. bizarre.
Bram is off somewhere - he was looking for a chair or something. Chuck loaned me his car for tomorrow - it's a lovely car, but it's so TINY. Holy schmoly.
Church today was good. I talked about "Doubt," and we kicked around the idea of what happens when you lose your goals or bigger picture. It was quite a conversation.
Mikey's flying to Newark tomorrow, and he's panicked. He hates to fly. Nothing I tell him makes a difference. I don't know whether he's trying to make me crazy, since he knows I'm an airline geek, or whether he's really this scared.
Talked today about the car thing. As I told Chuck yesterday, what I REALLY want is for the Universe to cough up the car or the resources for the car. And, I want .. I'm not sure. Maybe I need to get clear about that. Yarg.
I have so much to do. not having my computers working has really screwed me up.
Bram is off somewhere - he was looking for a chair or something. Chuck loaned me his car for tomorrow - it's a lovely car, but it's so TINY. Holy schmoly.
Church today was good. I talked about "Doubt," and we kicked around the idea of what happens when you lose your goals or bigger picture. It was quite a conversation.
Mikey's flying to Newark tomorrow, and he's panicked. He hates to fly. Nothing I tell him makes a difference. I don't know whether he's trying to make me crazy, since he knows I'm an airline geek, or whether he's really this scared.
Talked today about the car thing. As I told Chuck yesterday, what I REALLY want is for the Universe to cough up the car or the resources for the car. And, I want .. I'm not sure. Maybe I need to get clear about that. Yarg.
I have so much to do. not having my computers working has really screwed me up.
Friday, July 07, 2006
Friday attention
So, this is a PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT:
If anyone persists in calling me to blather on pointlessly about their job, boyfriend, daughter, manicurist, ex-boyfriend, would-be boyfriend, politics or other troubles, please expect the following:
First, telephone contact will be short and unrewarding.
Second, I will stop answering your phone calls.
Third, I will stop RETURNING your phone calls.
How do you know if you're a culprit, and that your telephonic contact is about to be or is being controlled? Here are a few clues:
a.) if you hear me say "I have to go now" and you suddenly rush in to ask me how I have been doing - this is a sign that you've not engaged me in the conversation at all.
b.) if you can feel me physically shove my way into your monologue to tell you that I have to get off the phone - like I have to cut you off and raise my voice to wedge my way in
c.) if I tell you something about a new gig, a new job, a new boyfriend, a new house, or that I've moved to Anchorage three weeks ago, and you say "I didn't know anything about that."
d.) if you hear my voice mail message A LOT
e.) if I start a telephone conversation by telling you that there's a time limit, which will be strictly observed.
Now, we return to our regularly scheduled program.
Ruby's back in the shop. This time, with a busted driver's seat frame - both sides failed. They are going to attempt to weld it back together, and then check to see if the seat mechanism continues to work. If not, then they're going to look for a replacement seat. This one's going to hurt.
Chuck's on his way over, and we're going to a.) pick up a check, b.) have dinner, c.) he swears he's going to fix this computer so it works. Finally.
Tomorrow, I've called off a meeting, and I think I'm going to see if I can get some work done OUTSIDE - Jackie's been digging up the planters next the patio, the garage door remains busted, and there are two light fixtures that need to be installed. The patio needs to be hosed/scrubbed down, as does the driveway. I need to find someplace to recycle paint. And, I have about a week's worth of computer work to catch up on. Since I haven't been able to do ANY.
If anyone persists in calling me to blather on pointlessly about their job, boyfriend, daughter, manicurist, ex-boyfriend, would-be boyfriend, politics or other troubles, please expect the following:
First, telephone contact will be short and unrewarding.
Second, I will stop answering your phone calls.
Third, I will stop RETURNING your phone calls.
How do you know if you're a culprit, and that your telephonic contact is about to be or is being controlled? Here are a few clues:
a.) if you hear me say "I have to go now" and you suddenly rush in to ask me how I have been doing - this is a sign that you've not engaged me in the conversation at all.
b.) if you can feel me physically shove my way into your monologue to tell you that I have to get off the phone - like I have to cut you off and raise my voice to wedge my way in
c.) if I tell you something about a new gig, a new job, a new boyfriend, a new house, or that I've moved to Anchorage three weeks ago, and you say "I didn't know anything about that."
d.) if you hear my voice mail message A LOT
e.) if I start a telephone conversation by telling you that there's a time limit, which will be strictly observed.
Now, we return to our regularly scheduled program.
Ruby's back in the shop. This time, with a busted driver's seat frame - both sides failed. They are going to attempt to weld it back together, and then check to see if the seat mechanism continues to work. If not, then they're going to look for a replacement seat. This one's going to hurt.
Chuck's on his way over, and we're going to a.) pick up a check, b.) have dinner, c.) he swears he's going to fix this computer so it works. Finally.
Tomorrow, I've called off a meeting, and I think I'm going to see if I can get some work done OUTSIDE - Jackie's been digging up the planters next the patio, the garage door remains busted, and there are two light fixtures that need to be installed. The patio needs to be hosed/scrubbed down, as does the driveway. I need to find someplace to recycle paint. And, I have about a week's worth of computer work to catch up on. Since I haven't been able to do ANY.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Rain-E Thursday
Another unproductive day, mostly thanks to my desktop computer, which is barely working at all. I can operate, at most, two software programs at a time, and nothing that sucks up a lot of memory.
Went to drop Ruby off to have her seat back fixed; I had made an appointment to have the work done more than a week and a half ago. Got there, and .. they won't take the car. They won't even discuss it until next week. I left. Came home, it had started raining, and the seatback had fallen into the back seat again.
Bitter, party of one.
Came home to the desktop freezing up. And freezing up. And San Jac being twits, as per the usual. They have extended the deadling for enrollment of the class that starts .. Monday .. until tomorrow. They tell the students fifteen different things, including that they don't know who the chosen instructor is .. and then, ask me if I'll cut my hourly rate to hold the class.
I spent hours trying to get the computer to work. Hours. Until nearly four o'clock. By that time, I was ready to scream.
I don't know how to catch up. Very frustrating.
Dinner with Chuck cancelled due to a blond moment, coupled with a younger, cuter Latin man being available.
Screaming is yet possible. I'm dizzy - I think my blood sugar is way out of whack.
Went to drop Ruby off to have her seat back fixed; I had made an appointment to have the work done more than a week and a half ago. Got there, and .. they won't take the car. They won't even discuss it until next week. I left. Came home, it had started raining, and the seatback had fallen into the back seat again.
Bitter, party of one.
Came home to the desktop freezing up. And freezing up. And San Jac being twits, as per the usual. They have extended the deadling for enrollment of the class that starts .. Monday .. until tomorrow. They tell the students fifteen different things, including that they don't know who the chosen instructor is .. and then, ask me if I'll cut my hourly rate to hold the class.
I spent hours trying to get the computer to work. Hours. Until nearly four o'clock. By that time, I was ready to scream.
I don't know how to catch up. Very frustrating.
Dinner with Chuck cancelled due to a blond moment, coupled with a younger, cuter Latin man being available.
Screaming is yet possible. I'm dizzy - I think my blood sugar is way out of whack.
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
More hump day that feels like Monday
Teaching my class - they're working on their in-class exercises.
Got all excited about the new VW Rabbit, until Bri in Hotlanta shot it out of the trees. Using an Uzi. And a ballistic missile. Now, I'm back to the ...
Hell, I don't know.
I talked over the A. Hitler thing with Donna today, and got more insight. It's very cool. Another article to write.
Got all excited about the new VW Rabbit, until Bri in Hotlanta shot it out of the trees. Using an Uzi. And a ballistic missile. Now, I'm back to the ...
Hell, I don't know.
I talked over the A. Hitler thing with Donna today, and got more insight. It's very cool. Another article to write.
So, I figured it out - Hump Day that feels like Monday
Had ten people yesterday (well, more than ten actually, but we got to ten and leveled off there as people came and went) Some of us hung in the pool, the rest cowered under the patio cover, Bram broke the garage door, hired some poor little guy from Home Depot's parking lot to paint his bedroom, and we watched a bunch of the Star Trek marathon. Fernando made sandwiches, queso and rum cakes, and a good time was had by all. No massive intoxication, no embarassing amorousness, and I had the kitchen clean and was in bed by 10:30. Well, I could have been.
So, I was reflecting on the Hitler dream this morning, especially the part about going through the airport to my (truly gorgeous .. oh, my) FW 200 with all of the people getting it ready to travel. I started to see that in that scenario, I was only focused on BIG picture issues. I wasn't concerned about the NOTAMS, or the tire pressure, or the catering load-in, or the departure clearances, or whether the airport fees had been paid .. I was only absolutely certain that all of those things had been done - certain to the point that I didn't think about them.
From a SOM perspective, in that mindset, everything that I was focused on INCLUDED having the airplane's needs (and therefore, my needs) attended to. I was comparing my own past focus with this perspective, and .. I've been focusing on the blades of grass.
The adage we're pulling in here is - can't see the forest for the trees. (I keep finding that these old adages have so much value and validity, kind of amazing.)
This isn't to say that you should (or I should) abandon attention to the small stuff. It's just that FOCUSING on the small stuff prevents one from focusing on the BIG stuff.
This morning, after my contemplation, I picked (back) up "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," having already read "The Rise and Fall of Adolf Hitler," and "Berlin Diaries." And, the very next sub-chapter I came to was the discussion of Adolf Hitler and his income before he became Chancellor. It seems that ol' AH gave very little thought to his support, and income stream. He just knew it would be there.
All of this provides me with fodder for further consideration.
Okay, it's time to get cracking on a few more things -
So, I was reflecting on the Hitler dream this morning, especially the part about going through the airport to my (truly gorgeous .. oh, my) FW 200 with all of the people getting it ready to travel. I started to see that in that scenario, I was only focused on BIG picture issues. I wasn't concerned about the NOTAMS, or the tire pressure, or the catering load-in, or the departure clearances, or whether the airport fees had been paid .. I was only absolutely certain that all of those things had been done - certain to the point that I didn't think about them.
From a SOM perspective, in that mindset, everything that I was focused on INCLUDED having the airplane's needs (and therefore, my needs) attended to. I was comparing my own past focus with this perspective, and .. I've been focusing on the blades of grass.
The adage we're pulling in here is - can't see the forest for the trees. (I keep finding that these old adages have so much value and validity, kind of amazing.)
This isn't to say that you should (or I should) abandon attention to the small stuff. It's just that FOCUSING on the small stuff prevents one from focusing on the BIG stuff.
This morning, after my contemplation, I picked (back) up "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," having already read "The Rise and Fall of Adolf Hitler," and "Berlin Diaries." And, the very next sub-chapter I came to was the discussion of Adolf Hitler and his income before he became Chancellor. It seems that ol' AH gave very little thought to his support, and income stream. He just knew it would be there.
All of this provides me with fodder for further consideration.
Okay, it's time to get cracking on a few more things -
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
A Birthday Present for America
From Daily Kos
By DarkSyde on osama
Here's a birthday present for ya America, courtesy of the White House I'm sure:
Link--WASHINGTON, July 3 -- The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday. [...] The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."
Yes, OBL, the guy President Bush said we were going to 'smoke out' 'dead or alive' is no longer deemed a threat--or at least not enough of a threat to actually you know, pursue vigorously from within the CIA. After all, the President is 'truly not that concerned about him,' even though bin Laden and his pal Aymen killed 3000 Americans and are threatening in every new Al Qaeda video production to kill some more.
What the fuck kind of President is George Bush anyway?
So, those of you who still support this administration - how does this action square with your certainty that they're protecting us from terrorism?
By DarkSyde on osama
Here's a birthday present for ya America, courtesy of the White House I'm sure:
Link--WASHINGTON, July 3 -- The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday. [...] The decision is a milestone for the agency, which formed the unit before Osama bin Laden became a household name and bolstered its ranks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when President Bush pledged to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice "dead or alive."
Yes, OBL, the guy President Bush said we were going to 'smoke out' 'dead or alive' is no longer deemed a threat--or at least not enough of a threat to actually you know, pursue vigorously from within the CIA. After all, the President is 'truly not that concerned about him,' even though bin Laden and his pal Aymen killed 3000 Americans and are threatening in every new Al Qaeda video production to kill some more.
What the fuck kind of President is George Bush anyway?
So, those of you who still support this administration - how does this action square with your certainty that they're protecting us from terrorism?
July 4th, bizarre dream edition
So, this morning, I was dreaming that I was Adolf Hitler, and it was the late 1930s. I was in New York for a meeting with some political figures. The room was lavish, and everyone was saying blah, blah, blah. I came to realize that they were telling me "this is the line you cannot cross," or "this is as much as we can give you," but that these were just words. I could do anything I conceived. I left, and went to the airport, to board my Focke-Wolfe 200 (the first four engine long distance airplane) It was there at the New York airport, polished to shine like a mirror, with fresh black and yellow trim paint. Crew people were buzzing around the aircraft, readying it for departure.
And then I had to climb the wooden stairs to the ship (these being dreams, they don't occur in a linear fashion.) The stairs were long and steep, and in the middle was a wooden structure that one had to slide undebrneath, part of a military training regimen.
There was a young military man coming down the stairs, and he limbo-ed under the structure, but I walked up and around on the outside. Then, I was talking to some guy who worked for me who hadn't completed some task he was to have done. I told him he had to cut his ear off in pennance. He did. That was gross.
Still thinking about the meanings of this dream.. it's interesting.
And then I had to climb the wooden stairs to the ship (these being dreams, they don't occur in a linear fashion.) The stairs were long and steep, and in the middle was a wooden structure that one had to slide undebrneath, part of a military training regimen.
There was a young military man coming down the stairs, and he limbo-ed under the structure, but I walked up and around on the outside. Then, I was talking to some guy who worked for me who hadn't completed some task he was to have done. I told him he had to cut his ear off in pennance. He did. That was gross.
Still thinking about the meanings of this dream.. it's interesting.
Monday, July 03, 2006
Monday, Monday ver. 822.01
Well, it's all stinky up in here today. Barbara is painting Bram's bedroom, and it turns out that she started by using OIL based wall paint (we scrounged through the garage for supplies.) So, the cucarachas are all dying swiftly, and my brain cells are failing by the thousands.
Have been opening a client's huge stack o'mail. Yurg. Have to get this all organized now. Have more things set up for this week.
So, I'm having a fag float tomorrow. This fag float was to have been brought to you by other members of my fag float team, who were so happy about the memorial day experience that they said they wanted to "chip in and do up the 4th of July." Now, they've decided that they are "just going to show up."
Thanks. Why again is it that they keep calling me bitter? Oh, yeah, because people don't follow through with what they say they'll do. Yurg.
Cleaned out the garage today. Hooo baby. Got the trash can FULL of stuff. Swept things down, moved things out, cleaned things up, it looks like a garage instead of a foreclosure in progress.
Later on
The house still smells. It smells as if I've soaked a bunch of charcoal in the living room; the lighter fluid smell is so heavy. Did I mention that the garage is nice and clean?
Have been opening a client's huge stack o'mail. Yurg. Have to get this all organized now. Have more things set up for this week.
So, I'm having a fag float tomorrow. This fag float was to have been brought to you by other members of my fag float team, who were so happy about the memorial day experience that they said they wanted to "chip in and do up the 4th of July." Now, they've decided that they are "just going to show up."
Thanks. Why again is it that they keep calling me bitter? Oh, yeah, because people don't follow through with what they say they'll do. Yurg.
Cleaned out the garage today. Hooo baby. Got the trash can FULL of stuff. Swept things down, moved things out, cleaned things up, it looks like a garage instead of a foreclosure in progress.
Later on
The house still smells. It smells as if I've soaked a bunch of charcoal in the living room; the lighter fluid smell is so heavy. Did I mention that the garage is nice and clean?
Sunday, July 02, 2006
Sunday - a pie bake-off
Rosita gave me some blueberries today, and I decided it was finally time to make up a pie with the cherry pie filling that came to live with me some nine years ago. Was it the kind of pie filling that can survive nine years?
It's good stuff!! The pie. With the nine year old cherry filling. Bram loved it. He's SUCH a great guy. This is turning out EXACTLY like I was wanting - with a room mate that's responsible, fun, great to be around, good company, and a participant in developing the house at a concept.
Barney's getting more feeble by the day. I put his collar on, and a few hours later, it's lying on the ground. He gets up unsteadily, and is deaf as a post.
It's good stuff!! The pie. With the nine year old cherry filling. Bram loved it. He's SUCH a great guy. This is turning out EXACTLY like I was wanting - with a room mate that's responsible, fun, great to be around, good company, and a participant in developing the house at a concept.
Barney's getting more feeble by the day. I put his collar on, and a few hours later, it's lying on the ground. He gets up unsteadily, and is deaf as a post.
Declare our Independance
Source Article
On the Fourth, Read the Declaration of Impeachment
By David Swanson
AfterDowningStreet.org
Sunday 02 July 2006
Veterans for Peace has drafted a Declaration of Impeachment using nothing but excerpts from the Declaration of Independence (plus a few words in parentheses). It reads as follows, and should be read at picnics and protests on the Fourth of July:
"... whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
... all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations ... design(s) to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
... The history of the present King (George)... is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny ... To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
* He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
* He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
* He has ... deprive(ed) us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury ... transport(ed) us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
* He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us ...
* He is at this time transporting large Armies ... to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
* He has constrained our fellow Citizens ... to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
A (President) whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
We, therefore ... do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People ... solemnly publish and declare, That these ... Free and Independent (People) ... are Absolved from all Allegiance to the (Bush Administration), and that all political connection between them and (this Administration), is and ought to be totally dissolved ... And for the support of this Declaration ... we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
Note that the colonists didn't just write these words. They also fought and died for them.
Supporting our troops and working to ensure that they not have died in vain are notions that no longer apply to the soldiers who died in the fields around my house in Virginia. The statute of limitations has expired, and the 4,435 who died to rid America of a King George are now in fact required - as a matter of patriotic duty - to have died in vain.
In vain their deaths to free us of a unitary executive.
In vain their deaths to establish freedom of assembly.
In vain their deaths to separate church and state.
In vain their deaths to create freedom of speech.
In vain their deaths in the cause of freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
In vain their blood spilled in rivers to establish the right to freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.
In vain their ultimate sacrifices to create a representative democracy based on checks and balances.
In vain the heartache of their families suffered in the name of an end to empire.
All in vain, all unsupported. Welcome to the world of free speech zones, detention without charge, no access to a court of law, no prohibition on torture. Welcome to the end of the veto and the birth of the signing statement. Welcome to an executive branch that neither obeys Congress nor so much as informs Congress of its actions. Welcome to wars of aggression for a theocratic plutocracy. Welcome back, King George.
King George is opposed by almost all Americans who identify themselves as democrats or Democrats. Only 9 percent of Democrats approve of his "handling the situation with Iraq," according to a CBS poll. The so-called Republican Party, on the other hand, is split. 71 percent of Republicans approve of the king's war, a number that is steadily declining. So, I have to say it annoys me a teeny little bit when the military industrial media complex calls the Democratic Party split and makes that alleged split the focus of reporting.
What they mean is that a little band of plutocratic leeches living in the swamps of the District of Columbia displays different tendencies from the citizenry. Within this inbred sect, Republicans are almost united and Democrats quite split on the question of whether to slaughter more Iraqis indefinitely. All the Republicans are for it, and half the Democrats are for it too. But half the Democrats have come over to the side of the American public to receive the scorn of the pundits and preachers of Objectivity.
What nobody is making note of, though, is that the anti-war Democrats in Congress can balance the scorn that the media bestows on them with the implicit gratitude of the soldiers of the War for Independence, the war in which we were opposing, not creating, a foreign occupation.
I fully expect, one day soon, to wake up to this headline: "Dems split on torturing grandmothers," followed by words to this effect: "Republicans forced a deeply divided and uncertain Democratic Party onto the defensive this week, bringing to a vote their long-planned GT bill. The Grandmother Torture Act of 2006 provides the President with the freedom he needs in handling the rising threat from seniors engaged in terrorist activities, said several Republican leaders. The defeat is expected to hurt the Democrats in November, Diebold executives reported.
Of course, on the question of building permanent military bases in Iraq, it is the Dems in Congress who are united and the Republicans in Congress who are very much split. But that story is not a story, so it doesn't really matter who's split or not split or anything else. Nor is historic justice being served the way it should. Every member of Congress working to create permanent bases in Iraq for unwanted and illegal foreign troops should have two dozen reenactors of the American Revolution occupy their office and live off their campaign funds while endlessly reciting the Declaration of Impeachment.
Happy Fourth!
David Swanson is creator of MeetWithCindy.org, co-founder of the AfterDowningStreet.org coalition, a writer and activist, and the Washington Director of Democrats.com. He is a board member of Progressive Democrats of America, and serves on the Executive Council of the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild, TNG-CWA. He has worked as a newspaper reporter and as a communications director, with jobs including Press Secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, Media Coordinator for the International Labor Communications Association, and three years as Communications Coordinator for ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Swanson obtained a Master's degree in philosophy from the University of Virginia in 1997. His website is www.davidswanson.org.
On the Fourth, Read the Declaration of Impeachment
By David Swanson
AfterDowningStreet.org
Sunday 02 July 2006
Veterans for Peace has drafted a Declaration of Impeachment using nothing but excerpts from the Declaration of Independence (plus a few words in parentheses). It reads as follows, and should be read at picnics and protests on the Fourth of July:
"... whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
... all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations ... design(s) to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
... The history of the present King (George)... is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny ... To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
* He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
* He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
* He has ... deprive(ed) us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury ... transport(ed) us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
* He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us ...
* He is at this time transporting large Armies ... to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
* He has constrained our fellow Citizens ... to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
A (President) whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
We, therefore ... do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People ... solemnly publish and declare, That these ... Free and Independent (People) ... are Absolved from all Allegiance to the (Bush Administration), and that all political connection between them and (this Administration), is and ought to be totally dissolved ... And for the support of this Declaration ... we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
Note that the colonists didn't just write these words. They also fought and died for them.
Supporting our troops and working to ensure that they not have died in vain are notions that no longer apply to the soldiers who died in the fields around my house in Virginia. The statute of limitations has expired, and the 4,435 who died to rid America of a King George are now in fact required - as a matter of patriotic duty - to have died in vain.
In vain their deaths to free us of a unitary executive.
In vain their deaths to establish freedom of assembly.
In vain their deaths to separate church and state.
In vain their deaths to create freedom of speech.
In vain their deaths in the cause of freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
In vain their blood spilled in rivers to establish the right to freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.
In vain their ultimate sacrifices to create a representative democracy based on checks and balances.
In vain the heartache of their families suffered in the name of an end to empire.
All in vain, all unsupported. Welcome to the world of free speech zones, detention without charge, no access to a court of law, no prohibition on torture. Welcome to the end of the veto and the birth of the signing statement. Welcome to an executive branch that neither obeys Congress nor so much as informs Congress of its actions. Welcome to wars of aggression for a theocratic plutocracy. Welcome back, King George.
King George is opposed by almost all Americans who identify themselves as democrats or Democrats. Only 9 percent of Democrats approve of his "handling the situation with Iraq," according to a CBS poll. The so-called Republican Party, on the other hand, is split. 71 percent of Republicans approve of the king's war, a number that is steadily declining. So, I have to say it annoys me a teeny little bit when the military industrial media complex calls the Democratic Party split and makes that alleged split the focus of reporting.
What they mean is that a little band of plutocratic leeches living in the swamps of the District of Columbia displays different tendencies from the citizenry. Within this inbred sect, Republicans are almost united and Democrats quite split on the question of whether to slaughter more Iraqis indefinitely. All the Republicans are for it, and half the Democrats are for it too. But half the Democrats have come over to the side of the American public to receive the scorn of the pundits and preachers of Objectivity.
What nobody is making note of, though, is that the anti-war Democrats in Congress can balance the scorn that the media bestows on them with the implicit gratitude of the soldiers of the War for Independence, the war in which we were opposing, not creating, a foreign occupation.
I fully expect, one day soon, to wake up to this headline: "Dems split on torturing grandmothers," followed by words to this effect: "Republicans forced a deeply divided and uncertain Democratic Party onto the defensive this week, bringing to a vote their long-planned GT bill. The Grandmother Torture Act of 2006 provides the President with the freedom he needs in handling the rising threat from seniors engaged in terrorist activities, said several Republican leaders. The defeat is expected to hurt the Democrats in November, Diebold executives reported.
Of course, on the question of building permanent military bases in Iraq, it is the Dems in Congress who are united and the Republicans in Congress who are very much split. But that story is not a story, so it doesn't really matter who's split or not split or anything else. Nor is historic justice being served the way it should. Every member of Congress working to create permanent bases in Iraq for unwanted and illegal foreign troops should have two dozen reenactors of the American Revolution occupy their office and live off their campaign funds while endlessly reciting the Declaration of Impeachment.
Happy Fourth!
David Swanson is creator of MeetWithCindy.org, co-founder of the AfterDowningStreet.org coalition, a writer and activist, and the Washington Director of Democrats.com. He is a board member of Progressive Democrats of America, and serves on the Executive Council of the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild, TNG-CWA. He has worked as a newspaper reporter and as a communications director, with jobs including Press Secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, Media Coordinator for the International Labor Communications Association, and three years as Communications Coordinator for ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Swanson obtained a Master's degree in philosophy from the University of Virginia in 1997. His website is www.davidswanson.org.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
How to Reduce the Size of Government
From Daily Kos
by kmiddle
Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 10:09:53 AM PDT
Government spending is out of control. On the Federal level, it's easy to just borrow more money (thanks China). But states have a tougher time; they can't just keeping the mint working overtime. And so the total tax burden continues to be near all-time highs for the average working family.
I have identified the reason behind this problem: Too many politicians.
All those governors, Speakers of the House, State Senators and Representatives, elbowing each other for position and voter attention. And they all feel the need to "do something" for their constituents, which almost always translates into "take money out of my wallet for something I don't need." Not to mention 50 state Attorney Generals, Secretary of States, Treasurers, etc. etc. etc. All full-time jobs, with their own staffs, security details, offices, lights, phones, computers...waste, waste, waste, I say.
* kmiddle's diary :: ::
*
So here's my modest proposal - one that will instantly reduce the size of government and reign in uncontrolled spending. Reduce the number of states from 50 to 10.
The current political borders for the states are historical artifacts that have no relevance to today's modern society. Can anyone living in Rhode Island honestly describe the major social and political issues that separate them from Connecticut? Hell, in Rhode Island, you have to go to another state to get to the Super Walmart.
Any state that has a geographic description in its name (eg, North, South) has obviously been begging for consolidation since its inception. Otherwise, they'd have had the good sense to pick a real name. And what's with this whole Arkansas/Kansas thing? Did Arkansas just want to get its Yellow Pages listing ahead of Kansas? Why not AAAArKansas instead?
Here are just a few benefits of cutting the number of states down to 10:
* An 80% reduction in the number of politicians who feed at the state government trough. Only 10 governors, etc. Think of the salaries saved! That alone should be enough to reduce taxes by 10%.
* An 80% reduction in the potential for mischief. Along with an 80% reduction in the number of people we Kossacks need to watch like hawks.
* An 80% reduction in the number of US Senators (only 20 instead of 100). Who can possibly argue that fewer US Senators is a bad thing?
* Better overall quality of politicians. Right now, for every John Murtha, there's a Bob Ney, a Jean (not so)Smart, and a Katherine Harris. If there are fewer jobs to chase, the most qualified people might actually have a shot at displacing the knuckleheads. (I know this is a bad example, because the US House is based on population; but having fewer state political offices will force politicians to look elsewhere for work. It's a "trickle up" theory.)
* School children would be freed from mindless memorization of state capitals and be able to concentrate on important stuff. Social studies teachers might actually be able to teach things like - horrors!!! - the Constitution.
Here are my recommendations for the new 10 United States of America;
* Rockysnowland: Combine Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Except for the upstate of Maine and Buffalo, they're all about an hour's drive from each other, and their regional issues are pretty much the same. Which is to say how shovel all that snow and how to farm around all those darned rocks.
* Delavanialand: Delaware, New Jersey, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. Back in the 1700s, New Jersey was hard to get to from Pennsylvania because of the Delaware River. Now we have things called "bridges." And what in the heck is Delaware doing hogging all the coastline from Maryland? Ridiculous. Combine them all.
* Minneconsin: Minnesota and Wisconsin. Cheese for everyone!!! Ice sculptures, too.
* Michohnoisy: Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, along with Kentucky. Michigan has to give up the noncontiguous portion to Minneconsin. It's mostly the old Northwest Territory, with Kentucky thrown in for good measure. As it is, the only reason Indiana exists is to prevent Ohio and Illinois from bumping into each other. So why not combine them all?
* NASCARalia: Alabama, the Carolinas, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. Yes, West Virginia, I realize you separated from Virginia during the Civil War. Get over it. War's over.
* Texarkanianohoma: Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas,. Alternative name: Tornadoania.
* Cornsas: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.
* Idakota: Idaho, Montana, North and South Dakota, Wyoming.
* Colozonah: Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah.
* Oceania: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington.
by kmiddle
Thu Jun 29, 2006 at 10:09:53 AM PDT
Government spending is out of control. On the Federal level, it's easy to just borrow more money (thanks China). But states have a tougher time; they can't just keeping the mint working overtime. And so the total tax burden continues to be near all-time highs for the average working family.
I have identified the reason behind this problem: Too many politicians.
All those governors, Speakers of the House, State Senators and Representatives, elbowing each other for position and voter attention. And they all feel the need to "do something" for their constituents, which almost always translates into "take money out of my wallet for something I don't need." Not to mention 50 state Attorney Generals, Secretary of States, Treasurers, etc. etc. etc. All full-time jobs, with their own staffs, security details, offices, lights, phones, computers...waste, waste, waste, I say.
* kmiddle's diary :: ::
*
So here's my modest proposal - one that will instantly reduce the size of government and reign in uncontrolled spending. Reduce the number of states from 50 to 10.
The current political borders for the states are historical artifacts that have no relevance to today's modern society. Can anyone living in Rhode Island honestly describe the major social and political issues that separate them from Connecticut? Hell, in Rhode Island, you have to go to another state to get to the Super Walmart.
Any state that has a geographic description in its name (eg, North, South) has obviously been begging for consolidation since its inception. Otherwise, they'd have had the good sense to pick a real name. And what's with this whole Arkansas/Kansas thing? Did Arkansas just want to get its Yellow Pages listing ahead of Kansas? Why not AAAArKansas instead?
Here are just a few benefits of cutting the number of states down to 10:
* An 80% reduction in the number of politicians who feed at the state government trough. Only 10 governors, etc. Think of the salaries saved! That alone should be enough to reduce taxes by 10%.
* An 80% reduction in the potential for mischief. Along with an 80% reduction in the number of people we Kossacks need to watch like hawks.
* An 80% reduction in the number of US Senators (only 20 instead of 100). Who can possibly argue that fewer US Senators is a bad thing?
* Better overall quality of politicians. Right now, for every John Murtha, there's a Bob Ney, a Jean (not so)Smart, and a Katherine Harris. If there are fewer jobs to chase, the most qualified people might actually have a shot at displacing the knuckleheads. (I know this is a bad example, because the US House is based on population; but having fewer state political offices will force politicians to look elsewhere for work. It's a "trickle up" theory.)
* School children would be freed from mindless memorization of state capitals and be able to concentrate on important stuff. Social studies teachers might actually be able to teach things like - horrors!!! - the Constitution.
Here are my recommendations for the new 10 United States of America;
* Rockysnowland: Combine Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Except for the upstate of Maine and Buffalo, they're all about an hour's drive from each other, and their regional issues are pretty much the same. Which is to say how shovel all that snow and how to farm around all those darned rocks.
* Delavanialand: Delaware, New Jersey, Maryland, and Pennsylvania. Back in the 1700s, New Jersey was hard to get to from Pennsylvania because of the Delaware River. Now we have things called "bridges." And what in the heck is Delaware doing hogging all the coastline from Maryland? Ridiculous. Combine them all.
* Minneconsin: Minnesota and Wisconsin. Cheese for everyone!!! Ice sculptures, too.
* Michohnoisy: Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, along with Kentucky. Michigan has to give up the noncontiguous portion to Minneconsin. It's mostly the old Northwest Territory, with Kentucky thrown in for good measure. As it is, the only reason Indiana exists is to prevent Ohio and Illinois from bumping into each other. So why not combine them all?
* NASCARalia: Alabama, the Carolinas, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. Yes, West Virginia, I realize you separated from Virginia during the Civil War. Get over it. War's over.
* Texarkanianohoma: Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas,. Alternative name: Tornadoania.
* Cornsas: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.
* Idakota: Idaho, Montana, North and South Dakota, Wyoming.
* Colozonah: Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah.
* Oceania: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington.
No one has caller ID?
I'm watching another anthology of gay short films; more tortured young homosexuals, and no one has caller ID. It's bizarre. And, why is everyone in these films 24 years old? Most of the 24 year olds that I know haven't the emotional or intellectual depth to fill a tea cup, let alone to engage in complex human interactions. Are we gay people so afraid of age and average that we can only depict ourselves through tight bodied children? The only old gay people that I've seen in a movie are either campy and ridiciulous (Nathan Lane in Birdcage) or they're intensely self-destructive (Fighting Tommy Riley) or psychotic killers.
Day two of zero motivation this week. What do to? I guess it's a weekend of working.
Ruby goes into the shop to have her interior trim pieces fixed next week. She really needs it.
I can't get Quicken to open up to save my life. Annoying.
Day two of zero motivation this week. What do to? I guess it's a weekend of working.
Ruby goes into the shop to have her interior trim pieces fixed next week. She really needs it.
I can't get Quicken to open up to save my life. Annoying.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)