Executive Pay
First, I don't like anyone getting a million dollar pay check, much less 10 million, or an indecent 100 millions a year. I refuse to believe someone is 10 times smarter than me, much less 100 or 1000 times smarter than me. Or 10 to 1000 times more valuable to society than me. First, I am a pretty smart guy, so 10 to 1000 times smarter than me is really, really, really, mind blowing smart. And 10 to 1000 more valuable to society than me, I doubt it.
Could I do an executive's job that gets paid 10 to 1000 more than me. Of course, I think I could. I also believe, of course, that I will never get a chance to prove it.
Capitalism is supposed to give back based on one's value to society. Well, not really you argue. Perhaps, it is more of a supply and demand thing. There is a shortage of good leaders. A lot of cash keeps chasing a few good men. The problem is, that we don't know who the few good men are. If the company fails, perhaps the game was un-winnable. If the company flys high, perhaps it was just the right time and the right place and the executive had nothing to do with the success. The trouble is, no one knows. But, the perception is that if you don't have the right guy at the top you are doomed. Lee Iacocca seemed like one of those guys that was worth the bucks they paid him. He certainly had the right stuff to save Chrysler for awhile. The question is, what percentage of people that would have been hired into this job would have accomplished the same thing. Certainly not all of them, but 25% of them, or even half of them, perhaps. The trouble is, we don't know. And if he had failed then we wouldn't be using him as an example, would we? Take Enron, do you want to nominate any of the Executives in Enron as GREAT leaders?
In my experience, most executives are just in the right place at the right time. Most are not significantly more brilliant or humble than me. But, they are in the Club, I am not. Yes, there is a Club at the top. The good old boy's club. They take care of each other. They occasionally adopt a new member that they believe can help to make them richer. Of course, I have never really met a member of the Club that is also an entrepreneur -- Entrepreneurs don't usually want in the Club since they a more independent personality type. Ya, I have met a few entrepreneurs, some of them pretty good. And none of them would have been accepted in the Club. One they don't need to be, and if anything they make a new Club. Clubs are made to get from corporations what entrepreneurs give to corporations.
Bill Gates. Entrepreneur turned philanthropist. He is someone that realizes that even in his brilliance he does not deserve a life with billions of dollars. Kudos to him. Just think, someday he will be down to his last billion. But, on the journey, hopefully the world is a better place. Of course, we all have that option in our own way. Perhaps it is not billions that we have to give away, but it is certainly more than most of us do. We are wealthy by any standard you want to use, from a historical or a geographical perspective, or some other. Since in these days, we are judged mostly by what we have, we lose some of who were are, of what we are worth as humans, by giving some of it away by our stupid standards. We of course, don't think this way, but we act this say, so I would argue that we believe this to be true. Give a dime away, we are worth less, both financially and morally. Proof me wrong by setting up regular payments to go to a cause that is more important than you rear pocket. Not tomorrow, today. I digress.
Quantum physics. If you plotted human abilities of any type, from those that have little of that ability, to those that have the best of that ability, you would find a more less continuous progression of abilities. Take Michael Jordon in basketball. Probably the best. A 10 on a scale of 10. Koby Bryant, Russell, Byrd, Magic all between 9 and 10 on that same ability curve. Some of MJ is legend, some of it is his team mates, some of it is being at the right place at the right time -- he was almost always given the last shot when the game was on the line. His percentage success at those times, I don't know -- it was probably higher than most other great players. Anyway, go down to the 8 to 9 on the ability scale and all the sudden there are thousands of players. Most executives are the 7 to 9 ability range, given that Bill Gates is a 10 on the ability scale. I have met a few sixes even that made it into the Club. I would put my own ability in the range of 8, perhaps 8.5, at my peak. Conceited perhaps, but honest. But, I don't matter. What matters is that there are millions of people that have the average ability of executives that run both our small and large corporations. These millions will not be given the opportunity to run corporations, or the access to funds to start up an entrepreneurial venture. The chosen ones, the one that join the executive club, will make millions, while the millions that are as talented that don't get a chance will make hundreds of thousands, or perhaps only tens of thousands a year.
If I am correct about this theory, then most executive pay is a waste of good money. So, why don't the corporations just find someone that will except less money. Well for one, the ones that make the recommendations for Executive Pay, are executives. Oh yea, they are on the Board of the corporation, but they typically work as Executives in other companies and they are selected by executives to be on the Board. In short, they are in the club and they recommend others in the club. They need a few new members each year, but they control the rate at which new members are added. It is as effective as any union, for instance, the medical doctor's union, or the metal worker's union. Even more, they control the funds and the path that our corporations follow.
Even more, the Club feels obliged to destroy other Unions in the corporation. And, at this they have done well. They limit benefits to Union members, pay, etc. They form lobbyists that get critical laws changed to keep them in power. They even elect Presidents that decrease taxes on the rich, yes both income taxes and inheritance taxes. The Club is very powerful. They also control the pay of executives. How, not by coercion, but by common sense. Pay grades are published for almost every profession, for example, engineers. For instance, there is a global shortage of engineers at the moment. Has pay sky rocketed? No, it has gone up substantially, but will technical pay ever approach the pay of those in the Club. No a chance. There are definite guidelines about how much is a reasonable bracket, or grade, to pay an engineer. Of course, all the major corporations have these brackets and considering an adjustment for the variations in the cost of living in different areas, they are almost identical. And who controls the brackets, the Club.
As the engineering shortage becomes more severe, is there any chance their will be a quantum jump in pay to jump from those that are employees to those that are in the Club. Nope, with global competition it is often a choice of decreasing the pay to those in the Club, or moving overseas to get good engineers. Well, you can guess which is going to happen.
And since, the amount of engineers is not artificially controlled, the pay rate increases will increase the size of the engineering pool. Baby boomers retiring and our kids getting too lazy to be engineers are the only reason there is an engineering shortage in the first place. But, there is no mechanism for increasing the size of the Club, except by election into the Club.
How do you get elected into the Club. By doing great things for the company. Sometimes, not not usually. Most of the time you become a "yes man" with just a touch of independence. You support the Club, you manage the troops for the Club and you keep them out of trouble. You must show you are willing to put the good of the Club above all else -- the good of the company, the workers, safety, etc. if it is to protect the Club. Study the fall of Enron if you want to see how it works. Of course, Enron forgot that even those in the Club can be kicked out if they go too far. It is like a wolf pack turning on an injured member when that happens. But, I have seen the Club draw in to protect itself more than once in my career. I was always foolish enough to believe that you had to do what is right, not what the majority wanted. Little did I realize I was being tested for membership in the Club and I was failing miserably.
So, take this theory to work with you and study those at the top. We often say that they are political. Yes, they are. That is the number one requirement to be in the Club. It is very rare to see one in the Club that is not political. Other required to be a member of the Club: social, correct, clean, controlled, and supportive of management. It is okay to occasionally talk of problems with management, but never mention a specific person, unless you know that he is already on the outs with the Club, or the Club is splitting up and you are choosing your side. However, it would be better to say good things about the Club members that you are sucking up to, than bad things about the Club members you think are on the way out. Who knows, which faction of the Club is going to come out on top. There could be other Club members higher up that have not weighed in yet.
Do you believe everyone on our planet is our brother? If so, how do we make laws and policies that help our brother? How do we need to change our thinking to lift the boats of all brothers?
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Energy Gorillas
Oil as been the energy gorilla of the 20th century. Oil will not the energy gorilla for America anymore.
Let's look in the closet. The Zoo closet. What energy Gorillas are in America's zoos. Coal and nuclear. That is it. Solar, chimpanzee. Wind, chimpanzee. Ethanol, pygmy monkey.
Coal with CO2 sequestering. Possible, but expensive. Nuclear, possible but very little local / American technology available to implement. Guess what, we will have to go France for this technology. If I recall correctly, they get about half of their power from nuclear energy. What about the Achilles heal of nuclear waste. See this quote from Frontline:
So, with French technology (originally Westinghouse technology from the U.S.) my family of four would make about a coffee cup of waste in a life-time. Nuclear Waste Storage in France.
Let's look at Yucca Mountain. First, we don't reprocess waste in the U.S. since it is illegal -- illegal recycling, cool. So we have more waste than the French since they allow recycling. That proves the French are smarter than Americans, by the way. No, it really proves that the military industrial complex controls this country. Figure that out on your own. But, I digress. We take the waste, put it in glass (glassification), put that glassy material in a canister made of a superalloy, and then bury it in a geological formation. Could something go wrong in 10,000 years. Yea, an asteroid could hit the world exploding our planet into a million pieces and thus releasing radiation on any alien passing through our galaxy that has not developed a Geiger counter. Don't laugh, it could happen. Of course, anything could happen. But, the real question is ... how probable are all the bad scenarios in impacting human life in the future.
Now, here is the correct question, which energy gorilla does the least damage to the planet. All energy gorillas hurt the planet. It is part of humanity's legacy. The question is does the coal gorilla or the nuclear gorilla cause the least damage.
First, lets forget the idea of permanent storage of nuclear waste. Let's just say we are going to store it for 10,000 years and then we are going to develop a permanent plan. That takes away the argument that we are just dumping it somewhere and letting future generations, which obviously won't be as advanced as us, to deal with it. We will set up a directive. We will take credit for the solution in advance.
Coal. Coal equals CO2, lots of it. Of course, we can pump it into the ground for temporary storage --you know, in geological formations like they do it already to keep oil wells spitting out their last few drops of oil. When the next ice age comes, we pump it back out into the environment and save the planet. Shoot, by then perhaps we will know how to use nuclear waste to warm the planet. We should take credit for all of this in advance.
The oil gorilla (OG) is dying. It is our job to decide which Gorilla is to lead us into the future, the Coal Gorilla (CG for short) or the Nuclear Gorilla (NG). Or perhaps, some combination of CG and NG. The only question I have is ... how high do gasoline prices have to go until American realizes that good old OG is on her death bed. She was great while she lasted. Look at all the money she saved us on public transportation, refurbishing the cities, and building energy efficient buildings and homes, etc. Life was good with OG.
Let's look in the closet. The Zoo closet. What energy Gorillas are in America's zoos. Coal and nuclear. That is it. Solar, chimpanzee. Wind, chimpanzee. Ethanol, pygmy monkey.
Coal with CO2 sequestering. Possible, but expensive. Nuclear, possible but very little local / American technology available to implement. Guess what, we will have to go France for this technology. If I recall correctly, they get about half of their power from nuclear energy. What about the Achilles heal of nuclear waste. See this quote from Frontline:
From the beginning the French had been recycling their nuclear waste, reclaiming the plutonium and unused uranium and fabricating new fuel elements. This not only gave energy, it reduced the volume and longevity of French radioactive waste. The volume of the ultimate high-level waste was indeed very small: the contribution of a family of four using electricity for 20 years is a glass cylinder the size of a cigarette lighter. It was assumed that this high-level waste would be buried in underground geological storage and in the 80s French engineers began digging exploratory holes in France's rural regions.
So, with French technology (originally Westinghouse technology from the U.S.) my family of four would make about a coffee cup of waste in a life-time. Nuclear Waste Storage in France.
Let's look at Yucca Mountain. First, we don't reprocess waste in the U.S. since it is illegal -- illegal recycling, cool. So we have more waste than the French since they allow recycling. That proves the French are smarter than Americans, by the way. No, it really proves that the military industrial complex controls this country. Figure that out on your own. But, I digress. We take the waste, put it in glass (glassification), put that glassy material in a canister made of a superalloy, and then bury it in a geological formation. Could something go wrong in 10,000 years. Yea, an asteroid could hit the world exploding our planet into a million pieces and thus releasing radiation on any alien passing through our galaxy that has not developed a Geiger counter. Don't laugh, it could happen. Of course, anything could happen. But, the real question is ... how probable are all the bad scenarios in impacting human life in the future.
Now, here is the correct question, which energy gorilla does the least damage to the planet. All energy gorillas hurt the planet. It is part of humanity's legacy. The question is does the coal gorilla or the nuclear gorilla cause the least damage.
First, lets forget the idea of permanent storage of nuclear waste. Let's just say we are going to store it for 10,000 years and then we are going to develop a permanent plan. That takes away the argument that we are just dumping it somewhere and letting future generations, which obviously won't be as advanced as us, to deal with it. We will set up a directive. We will take credit for the solution in advance.
Coal. Coal equals CO2, lots of it. Of course, we can pump it into the ground for temporary storage --you know, in geological formations like they do it already to keep oil wells spitting out their last few drops of oil. When the next ice age comes, we pump it back out into the environment and save the planet. Shoot, by then perhaps we will know how to use nuclear waste to warm the planet. We should take credit for all of this in advance.
The oil gorilla (OG) is dying. It is our job to decide which Gorilla is to lead us into the future, the Coal Gorilla (CG for short) or the Nuclear Gorilla (NG). Or perhaps, some combination of CG and NG. The only question I have is ... how high do gasoline prices have to go until American realizes that good old OG is on her death bed. She was great while she lasted. Look at all the money she saved us on public transportation, refurbishing the cities, and building energy efficient buildings and homes, etc. Life was good with OG.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Israel and Palesinte
It's been 60 years since Israel became a state.
It's been 61 years since we promised the Palestinians a state.
There can be no peace in the Middle East or the world until we keep the promises to the Palestinians.
It's been 61 years since we promised the Palestinians a state.
There can be no peace in the Middle East or the world until we keep the promises to the Palestinians.
Friday, May 16, 2008
the Cold War Again
Any one notice that Russia is no longer a democracy. Putin just appointed his right hand man as the top guy. I forgot his name but it translates as Bear. Putin then became Prime Minister and is still clearly in charge of Russia. Russia's economy which was improving in the 90's has now started to go south again. Even oil, which makes up about 30% of their income, is in decline. The government is taxing 92% of profits leaving them little left to invest in bring new fields into production. They make exceptions to get outside investors, but even then there is not a long line forming to get into the oil business in Russia. In short, they are killing their golden goose.
Russia had a big market through Moscow recently. Missiles, soldiers, etc. That kind of march. The flexing their muscles march. They are beginning to be hostile with words toward Georgia. Recall they also have thousands (THOUSANDS) of nuclear weapons. While they can not match the United States conventional army, they don't really need to. THEY HAVE ENOUGH NUCLEAR WEAPONS TO DESTROY THE PLANT ABOUT 30 TIMES.
And yet we fear Iraq and the middle east. We adjust our life style and change our principles in this country and do horrible things (torture) to both the guilty and the innocent. Because we are afraid of Ben Laden. That guy was brilliant. Evil brilliant, but still brilliant. Who would have thought that we would start down the road of the Patriot Act, torture, imprisonment with a trial (even of legitimate citizens), stupid and ineffective airport security, etc. because of single attack and a few more feeble attempts. Who would have believe as Americans that we were such cowards to give up our principles because we were afraid of him and his band of followers. And even worse, who would have believed we were stupid enough to spent a trillion dollars on a war to stop him (and stabilize an oil rich region (like that worked)) and in the end not accomplish much except for generating more people that hate us (terrorists in the making).
Meanwhile, we are now weaker and poorer with weakened principles and resolve. And guess what. The only real threat to world destruction, the nuclear bombs and those that possess it. The short brief period when Russia looked like our friend, did we try to start disarming. Of course not, we are stupid and too much filled with fear, see paragraph above. Meanwhile, Russia has started the spiral into behavior that can only renew the cold war. Couple that with China's growing strength and economic power and I would say that the self-weakened America should be worried about the future -- more on this subject later.
Russia had a big market through Moscow recently. Missiles, soldiers, etc. That kind of march. The flexing their muscles march. They are beginning to be hostile with words toward Georgia. Recall they also have thousands (THOUSANDS) of nuclear weapons. While they can not match the United States conventional army, they don't really need to. THEY HAVE ENOUGH NUCLEAR WEAPONS TO DESTROY THE PLANT ABOUT 30 TIMES.
And yet we fear Iraq and the middle east. We adjust our life style and change our principles in this country and do horrible things (torture) to both the guilty and the innocent. Because we are afraid of Ben Laden. That guy was brilliant. Evil brilliant, but still brilliant. Who would have thought that we would start down the road of the Patriot Act, torture, imprisonment with a trial (even of legitimate citizens), stupid and ineffective airport security, etc. because of single attack and a few more feeble attempts. Who would have believe as Americans that we were such cowards to give up our principles because we were afraid of him and his band of followers. And even worse, who would have believed we were stupid enough to spent a trillion dollars on a war to stop him (and stabilize an oil rich region (like that worked)) and in the end not accomplish much except for generating more people that hate us (terrorists in the making).
Meanwhile, we are now weaker and poorer with weakened principles and resolve. And guess what. The only real threat to world destruction, the nuclear bombs and those that possess it. The short brief period when Russia looked like our friend, did we try to start disarming. Of course not, we are stupid and too much filled with fear, see paragraph above. Meanwhile, Russia has started the spiral into behavior that can only renew the cold war. Couple that with China's growing strength and economic power and I would say that the self-weakened America should be worried about the future -- more on this subject later.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Food Subsidies to the "Poor" Farmers
Guess what it is time for a new farm bill. And guess what, they have subsidies for farmers. Legislators advise that any farmer whose adjusted gross income is above 750,000 dollars will not be eligible. Major reform, we are not just subsidizing the poor farmers, the ones that don't make close to one million per year.
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
The arguments;
1. Europe subsidizes their farmers even more. Okay, lets let Europe pay their farmers to go food for us. That works for me.
2. Farmers have a lot of equipment/expenses. Guess what, most farmers incorporate their business. Their AGI , adjusted gross income, is what a farmer gets paid by his corporation, after the bills have all been paid, and after his personal exemptions and deductions have been made. So guess what, I wish I had an AGI so the government wouldn't send me any more subsidies. Oh wait, they don't send me any subsidies. I have a small garden.
3. We don't want farmers to go out of business and depend on foreigners to supply food to us -- just like oil. Guess what, subsidies do not make our farm industry stronger. Over the long term, subsidies make it weaker. It keeps the weaker farmers from going out of business. It is also an industry that can ramp up and ramp down as required in a reasonably short period of time. In short, as an industry, it can adjust just like other industries. And guess what, many Americans have the option of planting gardens; we are not helpless, or perhaps, I overestimate us? Food is not like oil with a limited supply that is controlled by a few people on the planet. It is a stupid argument recently made by the sponser of the agriculture bill before congress now.
4. Poor farmers need the help. The help does not go to poor farmers; poor farmers don't have lobbyists, duh.
And finally, we are already indirectly subsidizing farmers. It is called "ethanol". ADM, Archer Daniel Midland, a big farm corporation is mopping up. I own the stock, I have held it for ten years waiting for this point in time. Its great for me and the big farm companies in this country. It is not clear to me who else it is good for. It is not really lowering our energy costs which are being offset in part by higher food costs. And of course, they don't help the Brazilians that make cheaper ethanol than us from sugar cane but that are not allowed to sell here without paying a tariff. It doesn't help anyone except the farm companies and the lobbyists that support them and the politicians that pay off the lobbyists / supporters with laws such as these. Farmers, lobbyists, politicians its a threesome that we are not part of -- no fun or profit for us.
ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
The arguments;
1. Europe subsidizes their farmers even more. Okay, lets let Europe pay their farmers to go food for us. That works for me.
2. Farmers have a lot of equipment/expenses. Guess what, most farmers incorporate their business. Their AGI , adjusted gross income, is what a farmer gets paid by his corporation, after the bills have all been paid, and after his personal exemptions and deductions have been made. So guess what, I wish I had an AGI so the government wouldn't send me any more subsidies. Oh wait, they don't send me any subsidies. I have a small garden.
3. We don't want farmers to go out of business and depend on foreigners to supply food to us -- just like oil. Guess what, subsidies do not make our farm industry stronger. Over the long term, subsidies make it weaker. It keeps the weaker farmers from going out of business. It is also an industry that can ramp up and ramp down as required in a reasonably short period of time. In short, as an industry, it can adjust just like other industries. And guess what, many Americans have the option of planting gardens; we are not helpless, or perhaps, I overestimate us? Food is not like oil with a limited supply that is controlled by a few people on the planet. It is a stupid argument recently made by the sponser of the agriculture bill before congress now.
4. Poor farmers need the help. The help does not go to poor farmers; poor farmers don't have lobbyists, duh.
And finally, we are already indirectly subsidizing farmers. It is called "ethanol". ADM, Archer Daniel Midland, a big farm corporation is mopping up. I own the stock, I have held it for ten years waiting for this point in time. Its great for me and the big farm companies in this country. It is not clear to me who else it is good for. It is not really lowering our energy costs which are being offset in part by higher food costs. And of course, they don't help the Brazilians that make cheaper ethanol than us from sugar cane but that are not allowed to sell here without paying a tariff. It doesn't help anyone except the farm companies and the lobbyists that support them and the politicians that pay off the lobbyists / supporters with laws such as these. Farmers, lobbyists, politicians its a threesome that we are not part of -- no fun or profit for us.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
China Long Term vs. U.S. Short Term
Comment below from my good friend Bob Brown At a time when our politicians are talking about a roast in every pot and a car in every garage, redistribution of wealth, new programs to help the poor. (Jesus said they will always be with us). Our guys say, we can solve all these problems, we just have to get more taxes for more and better welfare...Here is an interesting thought. Think about it. We are already pleading with the Chinese to change their long term strategic goals in order to help us as a country survive. Part of our problem is the exchange rate between the Yuan and the Dollar, we say. Like this country that has been in existence for over 4000 years and has had a banking system for much of that time...does not know what they are doing. We now need strong leaders with an understanding of what is happening long range. Our congressmen think in two year spans, our senators in 6 year spans and our presidential candidates in four year spans. What is a span?? The time that they have to face an election to maintain a personal life style which is infinitely better than anything they had ever hoped for as young struggling whatevers. This translates also to local politicians. They also love their jobs and the only way to keep them is to get votes, which they have learned to buy with government money (translate taxpayers money). They never get enough. But as they think in short term segments, the long term planning of our adversaries for world dominance goes along with little understanding of our leaders, who think only in how to get elected by promising more and better to each and every one. Hopefully, there is no copy write problem here using Helprin's article below to which Bob refers: OPINION | ||
The Challenge From China
By MARK HELPRIN
May 13, 2008; Page A17
May 13, 2008; Page A17
Even as our hearts go out to the Chinese who have perished in the earthquake, we cannot lose sight of the fact that every day China is growing stronger. The rate and nature of its economic expansion, the character and patriotism of its youth, and its military and technical development present the United States with two essential challenges that we have failed to meet, even though they play to our traditional advantages.
The first of these challenges is economic, the second military. They are inextricably bound together, and if we do not attend to both we may eventually discover in a place above us a nation recently so impotent we cannot now convince ourselves to look at the blow it may strike. We may think we have troubles now, but imagine what they will be like were we to face an equal.
![[The Challenge From China]](http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-BK984_oj_hel_20080512184118.jpg) |
| AP |
| Beijing: Delegates from China's military attend the annual session of the National People's Congress. |
China has a vast internal market newly unified by modern transport and communications; a rapidly flowering technology; an irritable but highly capable workforce that as long as its standard of living improves is unlikely to push the country into paralyzing unrest; and a wider world, now freely accessible, that will buy anything it can make. China is threatened neither by Japan, Russia, India, nor the Western powers, as it was not that long ago. It has an immense talent for the utilization of capital, and in the free market is as agile as a cat.
Unlike the U.S., which governs itself almost unconsciously, reactively and primarily for the short term, China has plotted a long course, in which with great deliberation it joins economic growth to military power. Thirty years ago, in what may be called the "gift of the Meiji," Deng Xiaoping transformed the Japanese slogan fukoku kyohei (rich country, strong arms) into China's 16-Character Policy: "Combine the military and the civil; combine peace and war; give priority to military products; let the civil support the military."
Japan was able to vault with preternatural speed into the first ranks of the great powers because it understood the relation of growth to military potential. A country with restrained population increases and a high rate of economic expansion can over time dramatically improve its material lot while simultaneously elevating military spending almost beyond belief. The crux is to raise per-capita income significantly enough that diversions for defense will go virtually unnoticed. China's average annual growth of roughly 9% over the past 20 years has led to an absolute tenfold increase in per-capita GNP and 21-fold increase in purchasing-power-parity military expenditure. Though it could do more, it prudently limits defense spending, with an eye to both social stability – the compass of the Chinese leadership – and assimilable military modernization.
As we content ourselves with the fallacy that never again shall we have to fight large, technological opponents, China is transforming its forces into a full-spectrum military capable of major operations and remote power projection. Eventually the twain shall meet. By the same token, our sharp nuclear reductions and China's acquisitions of ballistic-missile submarines and multiple-warhead mobile missiles will eventually come level. The China that has threatened to turn Los Angeles to cinder is arguably more cavalier about nuclear weapons than are we, and may find parity a stimulus to brinkmanship. Who will blink first, a Barack Obama (who even now blinks like Betty Boop) or a Hu Jintao?
Our reductions are not solely nuclear. Consider the F-22, the world's most capable air dominance aircraft, for which the original call for 648 has been whittled to 183, leaving, after maintenance, training, and test, approximately 125 to cover the entire world. The same story is evident without relief throughout our diminished air echelons, shrinking fleets, damaged and depleted stocks, and ground forces turned from preparation for heavy battle to the work of a gendarmerie.
As the military is frustrated and worn down by a little war against a small enemy made terrible by the potential of weapons of mass destruction, the shift in the Pacific goes unaddressed as if it is unaddressable. But it is eminently addressable. We can, in fact, compete with China economically, deter it from a range of military options, protect our allies, and maintain a balance of power favorable to us.
In the past we have been able to outwit both more advanced industrial economies and those floating upon seas of cheap labor – by innovating and automating. Until China's labor costs equal ours, the only way to compete with its manufactures is intensely to mechanize our own. Restriction of trade or waiting for equalization will only impoverish us as we fail to compete in world markets. The problem is cheap labor. The solution, therefore, is automation. Who speaks about this in the presidential campaign? The candidates prefer, rather, to whine and console.
We must revive our understanding of deterrence, the balance of power, and the military balance. In comparison with its recent history, American military potential is restrained. Were we to allot the average of 5.7% of GNP that we devoted annually to defense in peacetime from 1940-2000, we would have as a matter of course $800 billion each year with which to develop and sustain armies and fleets. During World War II we devoted up to 40% of GNP to this, and yet the economy expanded in real terms and Americans did not live like paupers.
The oceans have been our battlefields since the beginning; we invented powered flight; and our automobiles still await us on the surface of the moon – our métiers are the sea, air and space. Thus, we have been blessed by geography, for with the exception of South Korea our allies in the Pacific are islands. With Japan, Australasia, our own island territories, and Admiral Nimitz's ocean, we can match and exceed indefinitely any development of Chinese strategic power – which, by definition, must take to the sea and air.
* * *
And there we will be, if we are wise, not with 280 ships but a thousand; not eleven carriers, or nine, but 40, not 183 F-22s, but a thousand; and so on. That is, the levels of military potential that traditional peacetime expenditures of GNP have provided, without strain, throughout most of our lives. As opposed either to ignominious defeat without war, or war with a rising power emboldened by our weakness and retirement, this would be infinitely cheaper.
And yet what candidate is alert to this? Who asserts that our sinews are still intact? That we can meet any challenge, especially when it can be answered with our historical strengths? That beneath a roiled surface is a power limitless yet fair, supple yet restrained? Who will speak of these things in time, and who will dare to awaken them?
Monday, May 12, 2008
Consumption Has No Victims
We consume and no one suffers. That is what we like to believe in America.
We soak up resources and we like to believe there is no consequence of that consumption. If we were just consuming our own money, that might be true. But, we are borrowing money from all over the world, distorting the world's resources, to feed our habit.
But, the way it works is this. We consume stuff, others do without stuff because the world trusts us to pay them back. It is a trust we took centuries to build and yet we are destroying it in Jehovah Bush's two terms. If you are someone that makes a few dollars per day, guess what. Stuff is food. Food for you and your children. We soak up goods, someone else goes without food. At any moment, the amount of goods and services in the world is finite. One person takes from the pool, someone else does without. In the long haul, this is not true. The amount of goods and services being produced is increasing in the world, but at the moment you buy, they are fixed and interchangeable. In other words, your game box equals so man pounds of rice. And the more game boxes you buy, the more money you borrow to buy game boxes, the more the world tries to accommodate your needs and doesn't loan to the poor man to buy food. If the item you buy is a big ticket item, you probably get a disproportionate amount of the world resources dedicated to you at the expense of someone that just wants food.
Combine our high consumption with our throw-it-away almost before it is used philosophy and I believe we have the potential to waste a lot of resources. Couple that with our I don't care what I drive as long as it is big and I can look down on traffic attitude, and I think we can really burn through the resources. Finally, couple that with a military that burns through money like there is no bottom, and I think we become a sink hole of waste. With our past opulence, that was no sweat. But, that was a generation ago when we were far ahead of everyone, working hard, saving and educating our population. We do none of that well any more and our competition is not sleeping. The housing crisis are some of the roosters coming home to roost. We are now a poor country. Wake up America and stop living in the past.
It is still not too late to change our ways. It is a marathon and we out in front at the ten mile pole, however, the race is long and have others tucked in behind us riding in our wake, ready to pass us later in the race. As a first step, we need to review our value system. We need to pay our debts as individuals and as a country. Forget the tax cuts. We need to pay double taxes for ten years to just begin to shrink our debt. And both parties are still fighting to promise us what we want, less taxes. We deserve what we get.
We soak up resources and we like to believe there is no consequence of that consumption. If we were just consuming our own money, that might be true. But, we are borrowing money from all over the world, distorting the world's resources, to feed our habit.
But, the way it works is this. We consume stuff, others do without stuff because the world trusts us to pay them back. It is a trust we took centuries to build and yet we are destroying it in Jehovah Bush's two terms. If you are someone that makes a few dollars per day, guess what. Stuff is food. Food for you and your children. We soak up goods, someone else goes without food. At any moment, the amount of goods and services in the world is finite. One person takes from the pool, someone else does without. In the long haul, this is not true. The amount of goods and services being produced is increasing in the world, but at the moment you buy, they are fixed and interchangeable. In other words, your game box equals so man pounds of rice. And the more game boxes you buy, the more money you borrow to buy game boxes, the more the world tries to accommodate your needs and doesn't loan to the poor man to buy food. If the item you buy is a big ticket item, you probably get a disproportionate amount of the world resources dedicated to you at the expense of someone that just wants food.
Combine our high consumption with our throw-it-away almost before it is used philosophy and I believe we have the potential to waste a lot of resources. Couple that with our I don't care what I drive as long as it is big and I can look down on traffic attitude, and I think we can really burn through the resources. Finally, couple that with a military that burns through money like there is no bottom, and I think we become a sink hole of waste. With our past opulence, that was no sweat. But, that was a generation ago when we were far ahead of everyone, working hard, saving and educating our population. We do none of that well any more and our competition is not sleeping. The housing crisis are some of the roosters coming home to roost. We are now a poor country. Wake up America and stop living in the past.
It is still not too late to change our ways. It is a marathon and we out in front at the ten mile pole, however, the race is long and have others tucked in behind us riding in our wake, ready to pass us later in the race. As a first step, we need to review our value system. We need to pay our debts as individuals and as a country. Forget the tax cuts. We need to pay double taxes for ten years to just begin to shrink our debt. And both parties are still fighting to promise us what we want, less taxes. We deserve what we get.
Friday, May 09, 2008
Capitalism
Capitalism is a social system based on the recognition of inalienable rights in which people are free to produce and trade and thus precondition an economic system in which all property is privately owned[1][2] and operated for profit,[3] and in which investments, distribution, income, production and pricing of goods and services are determined through the operation of a market economy. It is usually considered to involve the right of individuals and corporations to trade, using money, in goods, services (including finance), labor and land.
A relatively simple definition. But, most of us are either very pro-capitalism or against capitalism. The corporation is probably the first thing people think about that are "against-capitalism." The first thing, I think about being a pro-capitalism guy is the entrepreneur. The entrepreneur as a symbol is the "baby" which metaphors into the corporation. All that is good and creative about the entrepreneur is why I hold capitalism dear. It has always been my ambition to be an entrepreneur, to grow a company that is providing a good quality product or service for a reasonable price, making a profit and providing a great place to work. As this company grows, it becomes more powerful - capable of doing more good (or bad) in the world.
To oversimplify things, the government defines the rules for capitalism. And to the extent that capitalism fails to do good for society, it is up to government to redefine the boundaries of fair operation of capitalism, usually this means a fair set of rules for corporations enforced by penalties and incentives to move in the direction that supports our long term goals as a nation.
Ok let's take Exxon. First, as a shareholder I am happy that their stock keeps rising in value. As a consumer of gasoline, you see their profits as adding to the cost of your gasoline. My guess is that their technology and efficiency is holding down the cost of your gasoline much more than their profits are raising the cost of your gasoline. They are the most efficient oil company in the world. Without them in the game, the second most efficient oil company would be making the profits that Exxon is making and would push the price up of gasoline even more. Let's face it, the U.S. is running out of oil that it controls either directly or indirectly. For a long time, companies like Exxon could talk countries out of their oil for a song and dance. Not any more, countries all over the world recognize they are in the driver's seat and now demand blood money even when their oil, like Kazakhstan, is many miles under the land and must be drilled from the ocean at an angle.
Ok, what gripe to I have with Exxon. Exxon is buying up all its stock. At the present rate it will not exist. Yes, that increases the value of the stock and from a profit motive for share holders is probably the best that can be done with the money. However, I want Exxon to be an energy company and make energy available to its customers. There is not a better management team in the world that is more capable of this than Exxon. I consider it as a moral shortcoming of Exxon not to be investing and developing alternative energy sources like BP is doing. It is true that companies have a legal responsibility to make the most profit they can from the money shareholders invest. But, the question is, on what timeframe. At some point, no matter how efficient Exxon in, the supply of oil from the planet will be too small for Exxon to make a reasonable profit. Perhaps solar panels or even "clean" coal or uranium will make more sense at that time. And, I suspect those that start investing money now will be better positioned, from a profit perspective, to make lots of profits in the future.
The biggest complaint I have against American Industry, against the American Corporation, is their obsession with short term profits. Not just yearly profits, but quarterly profits. I have worked inside of corporate America for forty years. Decisions are made every day to take actions that increase the quarterly profits at the expense of the long term health of the company, which is often tied to the long term health of our nation. Financial tools are available to track every company in the U.S., trying to estimate what is going to happen to their profits next quarter. Stock prices rise or fall by huge amounts when companies miss their earning estimates by one cent. It is stupid and short-sighted. It is also immoral. Wrong. We are selling out our future with the focus on next quarter. Research and development of new products and services, for instance, new sources of energy, require money to be spent today for tomorrow. Money that lowers the profits for the upcoming quarter, and usually many more quarters to come.
We need as a people to turn our sights on how we are going to get out of the energy crisis. My belief is that this energy crunch is the real thing, not a temporary shortage, but the beginning of a global crisis that will ultimately could end in a great war. Over dramatic, perhaps. No one can doubt that part of our motivation in Iraq was to provide stability to the middle east to insure that oil kept flowing, especially from countries that are friendly to the U.S. Most of us doubt that will work and many of us think it was wrong -- but that is not the current theme so we won't go there. But, when cars sit idly beside the road and our houses are cold, what do you think we as a nation are going to do. What do you think our military industrial complex, which has a mind of its own, is going to do.
Is this fate inevitable. No, the Exxon's of the world have the ability, if not the will, to change their narrow focus on oil, to the broader scope of energy. Entrepreneurial startup companies are already creating the concepts and new products to address the energy shortage. As their fruit ripens, the Exxon's of the world can implement the technologies at an astonishing rate. Will they. If they base their decision on short term profits, no. If they base their decision on the imperative for their company to survive and profit long into the future then yes. If they view themselves has agents of change of a new future that does not depend on oil, then good things can happen.
What is the current view of Exxon. They believe there are still large reserves of oil in the ground and that if they were given access to them, we would have plenty of oil. They believe as we run out of oil that we and all other nations will become desperate enough to let them drill for oil everywhere. For those of us that are the have-nots, this is probably true. But for those that have oil in excess of their domestic needs, the opposite is true. As they see oil prices climb, there will be tendency to hoard their oil, to demand more for access to their oil. They will look at oil as a means of modernizing their country, to padding their own pockets and raising the standard of living in their country. Oil becomes the seed money to modernize their own country. We are educating the children of the oil barons at our Harvard's, so what do you think is going to happen.
Oil companies have yet to accept this fact. Exxon is living in the past and for the moment making a lot more profits than they know what to do with. Perhaps, their is another way. We can take the profits we are making as shareholders and invest in energy companies that are investing in solar, wind, etc. Now to wrap up the good and evil theme of capitalism and their agents, the corporations, what is the government's role.
The government should reward companies that are producing energy based on alternative technology, embarking on a go-to-the-moon effort to increase alternative energy supplies. We should recognize that we are falling into a black hole, which is devoid of the energy to insure the prosperity of our children. It is the central issue in America's future prosperity, or alternatively the lack of energy is the one force that can mark the beginning of the end our country and our way of life.
A relatively simple definition. But, most of us are either very pro-capitalism or against capitalism. The corporation is probably the first thing people think about that are "against-capitalism." The first thing, I think about being a pro-capitalism guy is the entrepreneur. The entrepreneur as a symbol is the "baby" which metaphors into the corporation. All that is good and creative about the entrepreneur is why I hold capitalism dear. It has always been my ambition to be an entrepreneur, to grow a company that is providing a good quality product or service for a reasonable price, making a profit and providing a great place to work. As this company grows, it becomes more powerful - capable of doing more good (or bad) in the world.
To oversimplify things, the government defines the rules for capitalism. And to the extent that capitalism fails to do good for society, it is up to government to redefine the boundaries of fair operation of capitalism, usually this means a fair set of rules for corporations enforced by penalties and incentives to move in the direction that supports our long term goals as a nation.
Ok let's take Exxon. First, as a shareholder I am happy that their stock keeps rising in value. As a consumer of gasoline, you see their profits as adding to the cost of your gasoline. My guess is that their technology and efficiency is holding down the cost of your gasoline much more than their profits are raising the cost of your gasoline. They are the most efficient oil company in the world. Without them in the game, the second most efficient oil company would be making the profits that Exxon is making and would push the price up of gasoline even more. Let's face it, the U.S. is running out of oil that it controls either directly or indirectly. For a long time, companies like Exxon could talk countries out of their oil for a song and dance. Not any more, countries all over the world recognize they are in the driver's seat and now demand blood money even when their oil, like Kazakhstan, is many miles under the land and must be drilled from the ocean at an angle.
Ok, what gripe to I have with Exxon. Exxon is buying up all its stock. At the present rate it will not exist. Yes, that increases the value of the stock and from a profit motive for share holders is probably the best that can be done with the money. However, I want Exxon to be an energy company and make energy available to its customers. There is not a better management team in the world that is more capable of this than Exxon. I consider it as a moral shortcoming of Exxon not to be investing and developing alternative energy sources like BP is doing. It is true that companies have a legal responsibility to make the most profit they can from the money shareholders invest. But, the question is, on what timeframe. At some point, no matter how efficient Exxon in, the supply of oil from the planet will be too small for Exxon to make a reasonable profit. Perhaps solar panels or even "clean" coal or uranium will make more sense at that time. And, I suspect those that start investing money now will be better positioned, from a profit perspective, to make lots of profits in the future.
The biggest complaint I have against American Industry, against the American Corporation, is their obsession with short term profits. Not just yearly profits, but quarterly profits. I have worked inside of corporate America for forty years. Decisions are made every day to take actions that increase the quarterly profits at the expense of the long term health of the company, which is often tied to the long term health of our nation. Financial tools are available to track every company in the U.S., trying to estimate what is going to happen to their profits next quarter. Stock prices rise or fall by huge amounts when companies miss their earning estimates by one cent. It is stupid and short-sighted. It is also immoral. Wrong. We are selling out our future with the focus on next quarter. Research and development of new products and services, for instance, new sources of energy, require money to be spent today for tomorrow. Money that lowers the profits for the upcoming quarter, and usually many more quarters to come.
We need as a people to turn our sights on how we are going to get out of the energy crisis. My belief is that this energy crunch is the real thing, not a temporary shortage, but the beginning of a global crisis that will ultimately could end in a great war. Over dramatic, perhaps. No one can doubt that part of our motivation in Iraq was to provide stability to the middle east to insure that oil kept flowing, especially from countries that are friendly to the U.S. Most of us doubt that will work and many of us think it was wrong -- but that is not the current theme so we won't go there. But, when cars sit idly beside the road and our houses are cold, what do you think we as a nation are going to do. What do you think our military industrial complex, which has a mind of its own, is going to do.
Is this fate inevitable. No, the Exxon's of the world have the ability, if not the will, to change their narrow focus on oil, to the broader scope of energy. Entrepreneurial startup companies are already creating the concepts and new products to address the energy shortage. As their fruit ripens, the Exxon's of the world can implement the technologies at an astonishing rate. Will they. If they base their decision on short term profits, no. If they base their decision on the imperative for their company to survive and profit long into the future then yes. If they view themselves has agents of change of a new future that does not depend on oil, then good things can happen.
What is the current view of Exxon. They believe there are still large reserves of oil in the ground and that if they were given access to them, we would have plenty of oil. They believe as we run out of oil that we and all other nations will become desperate enough to let them drill for oil everywhere. For those of us that are the have-nots, this is probably true. But for those that have oil in excess of their domestic needs, the opposite is true. As they see oil prices climb, there will be tendency to hoard their oil, to demand more for access to their oil. They will look at oil as a means of modernizing their country, to padding their own pockets and raising the standard of living in their country. Oil becomes the seed money to modernize their own country. We are educating the children of the oil barons at our Harvard's, so what do you think is going to happen.
Oil companies have yet to accept this fact. Exxon is living in the past and for the moment making a lot more profits than they know what to do with. Perhaps, their is another way. We can take the profits we are making as shareholders and invest in energy companies that are investing in solar, wind, etc. Now to wrap up the good and evil theme of capitalism and their agents, the corporations, what is the government's role.
The government should reward companies that are producing energy based on alternative technology, embarking on a go-to-the-moon effort to increase alternative energy supplies. We should recognize that we are falling into a black hole, which is devoid of the energy to insure the prosperity of our children. It is the central issue in America's future prosperity, or alternatively the lack of energy is the one force that can mark the beginning of the end our country and our way of life.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Food Price, Humanity and Free Markets
Don't feel sorry for yourself when you go to the market for food. Yea, it hurts your pocket book some. You might have to drop back on your NetFlix's subscription from 3 people in your family getting all the movies they want to only one movie per family per trip to the mail box. Tragic. Another American consumer gets hit in their religion, "Consumerism".
For millions of people living on less than one dollar per day, it means starvation. Not an inconvenience, it means death to them and their children. Imagine being powerless to do anything, and worse, not having the energy to care as your child dies because you have no way to bring them food. Hard to imagine in a world that has the big Mac, the Whopper, and French fries on every corner. We are pigs and we don't care that others are dying because they don't have access to our scraps. And, we don't give a damn.
And for the small majority that notices, note, I didn't say cares, what do they do. Should we send food. Yes, we can fill up the ships and send grain, even in a time of "shortage" in America. However, if you give food to a country that is starving, what happens to the farmers that our struggling to grow crops in those countries. Guess what. They go out of business, making the problem worse on the long haul. What has to be done. We have to help the farmers to grow more as people starve to save more in the future. You think it is hard to let your children learn from life. Imagine. Letting millions starve. Help me if I am wrong here, because this solution is painful.
I don't know how to go through life without seeing the sorrow, the sadness in every turn. How can Jehovah Bush say we are going to keep making ethanol from grain as people starve. How can we keep a tariff in place against Brazil that makes ethanol from sugar cane, which would free up corn from America, when people are starving. Simple, we don't give a damn in America except for ourselves. Consumerism is all that matters. We have to have our stuff, our next fix. Who cares that our our polices impact the world. America is the greatest.
For millions of people living on less than one dollar per day, it means starvation. Not an inconvenience, it means death to them and their children. Imagine being powerless to do anything, and worse, not having the energy to care as your child dies because you have no way to bring them food. Hard to imagine in a world that has the big Mac, the Whopper, and French fries on every corner. We are pigs and we don't care that others are dying because they don't have access to our scraps. And, we don't give a damn.
And for the small majority that notices, note, I didn't say cares, what do they do. Should we send food. Yes, we can fill up the ships and send grain, even in a time of "shortage" in America. However, if you give food to a country that is starving, what happens to the farmers that our struggling to grow crops in those countries. Guess what. They go out of business, making the problem worse on the long haul. What has to be done. We have to help the farmers to grow more as people starve to save more in the future. You think it is hard to let your children learn from life. Imagine. Letting millions starve. Help me if I am wrong here, because this solution is painful.
I don't know how to go through life without seeing the sorrow, the sadness in every turn. How can Jehovah Bush say we are going to keep making ethanol from grain as people starve. How can we keep a tariff in place against Brazil that makes ethanol from sugar cane, which would free up corn from America, when people are starving. Simple, we don't give a damn in America except for ourselves. Consumerism is all that matters. We have to have our stuff, our next fix. Who cares that our our polices impact the world. America is the greatest.
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Witch Hillary Flies Away
Witch Hillary. That's a woman I don't trust. Not to mention her hubby. It is easy to imagine in some dark smoke filled room (from the old days) her making a deal where Obama is booted out and she becomes the darling of the party. She wins the Presidency, because the democrats can't lose unless they kill each other off, proving that Obama couldn't have won.
McCain. I like the old dude. But, I am 60 and understand that unless you are Regan you are going to be falling asleep during cabinet meetings if you are older than 70. Oh yea, Reagan did that. No I liked Reagan, and staying awake is not all that it is cracked up to be. Well, McCain is not going to be our next President.
So, lets look at what is going to happen when the Democrats take power. Medical insurance. National retirement plan. Subsidies for solar, gasoline, etc. Higher taxes on oil companies, which means less oil in the future. More green. No drilling in Alaska, no Nuclear Power boom. Ethanol, no real change, starving people be damned. Social security, the democrats are not going to party up to the bar. Raise taxes, not likely with the recession still in full bloom when they take over. Ok, the big problem, how do you pay for the Democrats?
The truth is you can't. The military runs the country. They were not voted out and they cannot be voted out. You think I jest. Wait and see. The democrats will only cut the rate of increase of the military. Raise taxes, yes, on the rich, but not not enough to make a difference. A cut in the deficit spending to reduce the rate of inflation, not likely. So, what happens. Unbridled inflation, the dollar spiraling downward. And alas, the military starts another war. Where, probably Iran, but don't underestimate the military to capitalize on a new perceived threat and our fear, coupled with a lack of a morality, to redirect American paranoia.
Will the democrats do anything to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world. Nope. Remember, the military industrial complex controls that... Hopefully, the brighter ones of you should be recognizing a pattern. The only thing that can pay for the changes that the democrats will bring is a reduction in the military ... and changes in the military are off the table. Where does that leave the country? In the dumpster. Don't say you weren't warned, well to be honest, the young are not listening to the old in this country any more. Sa la vie.
McCain. I like the old dude. But, I am 60 and understand that unless you are Regan you are going to be falling asleep during cabinet meetings if you are older than 70. Oh yea, Reagan did that. No I liked Reagan, and staying awake is not all that it is cracked up to be. Well, McCain is not going to be our next President.
So, lets look at what is going to happen when the Democrats take power. Medical insurance. National retirement plan. Subsidies for solar, gasoline, etc. Higher taxes on oil companies, which means less oil in the future. More green. No drilling in Alaska, no Nuclear Power boom. Ethanol, no real change, starving people be damned. Social security, the democrats are not going to party up to the bar. Raise taxes, not likely with the recession still in full bloom when they take over. Ok, the big problem, how do you pay for the Democrats?
The truth is you can't. The military runs the country. They were not voted out and they cannot be voted out. You think I jest. Wait and see. The democrats will only cut the rate of increase of the military. Raise taxes, yes, on the rich, but not not enough to make a difference. A cut in the deficit spending to reduce the rate of inflation, not likely. So, what happens. Unbridled inflation, the dollar spiraling downward. And alas, the military starts another war. Where, probably Iran, but don't underestimate the military to capitalize on a new perceived threat and our fear, coupled with a lack of a morality, to redirect American paranoia.
Will the democrats do anything to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world. Nope. Remember, the military industrial complex controls that... Hopefully, the brighter ones of you should be recognizing a pattern. The only thing that can pay for the changes that the democrats will bring is a reduction in the military ... and changes in the military are off the table. Where does that leave the country? In the dumpster. Don't say you weren't warned, well to be honest, the young are not listening to the old in this country any more. Sa la vie.
Monday, May 05, 2008
Military -- What % of the Discretionary Budget
What percent is the Military of the discretionary budget of the U.S.? Discretionary means you take out all of the entitlement programs, social security, government retirement, and of course, the big one, national debt. I would guess, and since no one reads this blog I am the undisputed authority, let's say it is 50%.
My point is simple, until we drop our military spending down to just the total of what all the other nations spend in the world combined, we have no chance of doing much here at home in any other area. Of course, there is no option to drop our spending down to what China or Russia together spend. Who knows what evil they have planned. Paranoia. Actually, they are smarter than us since they realize that each of us, plus a few other countries, already have the power to destroy the world -- so what else can a few trillion get you. We call it the point of diminishing returns in economics. Of course, Jehovah Bush can't be expected to grasp such concepts, not to mention our Congress.
Jehovah Bush when he retires, I hear, is going to help Al Gore explain Global Warming in 2010. By the way, I hear the ocean level has been rising for 18,000 years ... about 30 cm per year. But, that is another subject for another day.
Guess what, the war is extra. Kind of a bonus plan to poverty for this nation. It will mess up a trillion dollars before it is done.
So, lets imagine that we did not spend more money on the military than all other nations combined. I know, its a silly thought. And, let's imagine that we didn't waste a million killing people in the middle east via our righteous war. Say we could muffle Jehovah Bush for a moment and all those that support the "killing fields." A trillion dollars, 10^12 dollars. That's enough to educate 300 million students for a year. We don't even have that many students. We would have to educate all the Mexican and Canadian children, too. I need a number for our annual military budget so I can estimate how many of the Mexicans we will have to send home after the first year.
My point is simple, until we drop our military spending down to just the total of what all the other nations spend in the world combined, we have no chance of doing much here at home in any other area. Of course, there is no option to drop our spending down to what China or Russia together spend. Who knows what evil they have planned. Paranoia. Actually, they are smarter than us since they realize that each of us, plus a few other countries, already have the power to destroy the world -- so what else can a few trillion get you. We call it the point of diminishing returns in economics. Of course, Jehovah Bush can't be expected to grasp such concepts, not to mention our Congress.
Jehovah Bush when he retires, I hear, is going to help Al Gore explain Global Warming in 2010. By the way, I hear the ocean level has been rising for 18,000 years ... about 30 cm per year. But, that is another subject for another day.
Saturday, May 03, 2008
Earth Haven - Retake
Well, that went well. Told my wife about Earth Haven and the solar house I lived in. Aside from not paying much attention, she wanted to know why she had to give up everything to go solar. I heard, "why do I have to give up anything to go solar." Hence the biggest problem, "no one wants to alter their life style for what lies ahead."
Also, I realize that converting over to a solar living style would require starting all over with this house and my life. I am returning to accepting the status quo with multiple lights on, the tv on, and the computer on all at the same time, keeping my George Foreman Grill, and nursing along my old inefficient refrigerator and dryer. The transition could be painful. I believe that is where the government has to step in.
When companies buy equipment they are allowed to depreciate the investment over the life of the equipment. This in effect removes this money over time from being considered profits and being taxable. There are also R&D tax credits, subsidies to rich farmers, etc. In addition, we have a long tradition of helping those with good lobbyists to get on government dole in one way or another. And of course, the military no longer need lobbyists since they run the show. Is it too much to expect the federal and local governments to start strongly assisting the transition to an alternatively powered country.
Didn't the government subsidy on solar end. In any case it was too feeble. A solar power system for a home will cost of the order of $20 to $40K. At the bare minimum, this should be a deduction on the income tax, perhaps spread over a decade. Even better, perhaps 10% or so should be a tax credit. The same thing goes for wind power or solar hot water heating. Passive solar should get some boost, although that is more complicated since it is easy to say a house has been designed to be passive. Perhaps, these are best judged by results. This is easily done by escalating the cost of power based on usage. A family of a fixed size pays dearly if they use more than the average power consumption for their zip code. Of course, until America notices the upcoming energy crisis and the impact it is having on our living standards, our ability to do anything else constructive, this will not be popular -- so it won't happen.
I mentioned to my tennis buddies about the solar house and giving up on all the mixers, hair dryers, etc. They were cool with it until one asked if they could gave air conditioning in the summer. I said probably not. Just shade covered houses. Well, that didn't go over well.
Anyway, I lived in a solar house in NC for four days, three of which were cloudy and rainy and my life was okay. Coupled with the other social changes in the community there, it was more fun than I have had in forever. Soon it will fade back into my memories as I get sucked back into the real world build solidly on cheap energy.
Also, I realize that converting over to a solar living style would require starting all over with this house and my life. I am returning to accepting the status quo with multiple lights on, the tv on, and the computer on all at the same time, keeping my George Foreman Grill, and nursing along my old inefficient refrigerator and dryer. The transition could be painful. I believe that is where the government has to step in.
When companies buy equipment they are allowed to depreciate the investment over the life of the equipment. This in effect removes this money over time from being considered profits and being taxable. There are also R&D tax credits, subsidies to rich farmers, etc. In addition, we have a long tradition of helping those with good lobbyists to get on government dole in one way or another. And of course, the military no longer need lobbyists since they run the show. Is it too much to expect the federal and local governments to start strongly assisting the transition to an alternatively powered country.
Didn't the government subsidy on solar end. In any case it was too feeble. A solar power system for a home will cost of the order of $20 to $40K. At the bare minimum, this should be a deduction on the income tax, perhaps spread over a decade. Even better, perhaps 10% or so should be a tax credit. The same thing goes for wind power or solar hot water heating. Passive solar should get some boost, although that is more complicated since it is easy to say a house has been designed to be passive. Perhaps, these are best judged by results. This is easily done by escalating the cost of power based on usage. A family of a fixed size pays dearly if they use more than the average power consumption for their zip code. Of course, until America notices the upcoming energy crisis and the impact it is having on our living standards, our ability to do anything else constructive, this will not be popular -- so it won't happen.
I mentioned to my tennis buddies about the solar house and giving up on all the mixers, hair dryers, etc. They were cool with it until one asked if they could gave air conditioning in the summer. I said probably not. Just shade covered houses. Well, that didn't go over well.
Anyway, I lived in a solar house in NC for four days, three of which were cloudy and rainy and my life was okay. Coupled with the other social changes in the community there, it was more fun than I have had in forever. Soon it will fade back into my memories as I get sucked back into the real world build solidly on cheap energy.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Earth Haven - The Energy Crisis
Whow!
I just spent a week living in a solar home and in a community that is trying to be self-sufficient, Earth Haven in NC. Since they are humans, they have a bucket of problems just like the rest of us. Nevertheless, I consider the experience life altering. I feel like Moses when he was given a glimpse of the promise land from high a top a hill.
This Moses is not qualified by his virtue, but by his technical skills. The people in Earth Haven are qualified by their personal courage to run an experiment with their lives for the rest of us to benefit.
I am going to be writing about what I saw and thought for years to come. But just a glimpse. If you live in a solar home on a week when it rains three days a week, guess what. You have to adjust your life and consider what energy consumption is required. Guess what, you turn off the tv, actually they didn't have a tv, but they did have a great system to watch movies on, DVD, screeen, etc. Guess what. We had to talk to each other and play board games. We watched the news from Democracy.Now on a laptop. We turned lights on in the vicinity of where we they were needed, no where else. No hair dryers (use a towel), no toasters, no microwaves, no electric mixers, no Foreman grills. And guess what, it was fine. It was more than fine, it was great. The family actually has to plan and talk to each about their day.
Now this house used propane for their heat. Others used wood stoves. Others did better with passive solar. More on all the technologies at another time.
Guess what. When you have to manage your energy consumption it forces you to make the decisions necessary to alter your lives. Imagine if all Americans had to live for a few weeks with a limited amount of energy coming into their house. Imagine a small wire coming into your house to charge your batteries. A fixed supply of energy to be used as your family deemed important. Most families are dysfunctional at some level, so the initial drama could be huge.
I can hear you now. I am not giving up my living style. Its too good. I am too happy with the life style myself and my family have. I have a right to waste as much energy as I choose. Screw the food shortage, those poor bastards who need the food that we are converting to ethanol be damned. Jehovah Bush just told us it was okay, in fact, it is good for America. If you believe Jehovah Bush, then go find another blog.
This is the beginning of a long journey, first in my mind, then hopefully in my life, to apply what I just learned this week. It is not that I saw a perfect world at Earth Haven, far from it, but I saw the rarest of events, a new concept for my life. Today I felt the first stirrings of that seed, trying to send out a small root into my consciousness. I hope to encourage the growth of that seed until it push a bud right through the top of my thick skull.
I just spent a week living in a solar home and in a community that is trying to be self-sufficient, Earth Haven in NC. Since they are humans, they have a bucket of problems just like the rest of us. Nevertheless, I consider the experience life altering. I feel like Moses when he was given a glimpse of the promise land from high a top a hill.
This Moses is not qualified by his virtue, but by his technical skills. The people in Earth Haven are qualified by their personal courage to run an experiment with their lives for the rest of us to benefit.
I am going to be writing about what I saw and thought for years to come. But just a glimpse. If you live in a solar home on a week when it rains three days a week, guess what. You have to adjust your life and consider what energy consumption is required. Guess what, you turn off the tv, actually they didn't have a tv, but they did have a great system to watch movies on, DVD, screeen, etc. Guess what. We had to talk to each other and play board games. We watched the news from Democracy.Now on a laptop. We turned lights on in the vicinity of where we they were needed, no where else. No hair dryers (use a towel), no toasters, no microwaves, no electric mixers, no Foreman grills. And guess what, it was fine. It was more than fine, it was great. The family actually has to plan and talk to each about their day.
Now this house used propane for their heat. Others used wood stoves. Others did better with passive solar. More on all the technologies at another time.
Guess what. When you have to manage your energy consumption it forces you to make the decisions necessary to alter your lives. Imagine if all Americans had to live for a few weeks with a limited amount of energy coming into their house. Imagine a small wire coming into your house to charge your batteries. A fixed supply of energy to be used as your family deemed important. Most families are dysfunctional at some level, so the initial drama could be huge.
I can hear you now. I am not giving up my living style. Its too good. I am too happy with the life style myself and my family have. I have a right to waste as much energy as I choose. Screw the food shortage, those poor bastards who need the food that we are converting to ethanol be damned. Jehovah Bush just told us it was okay, in fact, it is good for America. If you believe Jehovah Bush, then go find another blog.
This is the beginning of a long journey, first in my mind, then hopefully in my life, to apply what I just learned this week. It is not that I saw a perfect world at Earth Haven, far from it, but I saw the rarest of events, a new concept for my life. Today I felt the first stirrings of that seed, trying to send out a small root into my consciousness. I hope to encourage the growth of that seed until it push a bud right through the top of my thick skull.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)