Urtabulak and Ixtoc - two obscure names that can be found in the dusty (and unread) journals of historic blunders. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Let's go back 47 years and see how little we've learned.
In 1963, a natural gas well in Urtabulak (southern Uzbekistan) burst into flames, shooting a burning pillar 400 feet into the air. The Soviets had not developed sufficient control mechanisms and so it burned for three years with 12 million cubic meters of gas burning every day (over three cubic miles of gas burned). After countless attempts and strategies to quell the fire, the Soviets finally found a solution in 1966 ... they nuked the well. As drastic as that may sound, it worked.
In 1979, an offshore oil rig (named Ixtoc) in the Bay of Campeche in the Gulf of Mexico exploded and leaked oil into the gulf for nine months, spilling a total of 150 million gallons of oil. The efforts to stop the leak were identical to those used by BP over the past month (submersible robots, dispersants, burning it off, boom floats, a huge containment dome, a heavy dumping cover, and finally drilling relief wells).
It's easy for people to blame BP for the recent oil spill disaster. They cut corners on quality and safety procedures to save a buck (a lot of bucks, actually). Sadly, when this is all over and becomes yet another line in a dusty unread history book, BP execs will probably get huge bonuses for finally containing the spill.
But back to the blame and lessons unlearned. Regressive politicians were quick to blame environmentalists for the spill (yeah, I had to read that several times myself before realizing it wasn't a joke). The bureaucratic MMS (Minerals Management Service) is another good blame-sink, rich in incompetence and corruption. The Bush-Cheney administration likewise deserves much of the blame as they presided over the reduction of oversight and drilling regulations (discounting the requirement for remote shut-off switches). And President Obama deserves some blame too. As they say, the buck stops there and it's only fair given that his administration caved to the "Drill Baby Drill" mantra and expanded the off-shore drilling efforts by ending the moratorium on oil exploration along the East coast.
Where was I? Oh yeah, who's the blame for this mess? Consider the damages ... the brown pelican, once brought back from the verge of extinction, could likely meet its oily end. Also threatened are the blue fin tuna, Kemp Ridley turtles, and manatees. As a popular mouthpiece might point out, "Those rabid pelican extremists forced us to take unnecessary risks!" Yeah, let's blame the gulf shrimp, oysters and blue crabs while we're at it.
No ... I think we're missing the point here. As much as I'd like to plug the leaking pipe with Tony Hayward's head, the core blame lays with America's unquenchable thirst for oil. In 1970, the US imported 24% of its consumed oil. President Nixon called it an "energy crisis" and warned of the dangers of foreign oil dependence saying "Our independence will depend on maintaining and achieving self-sufficiency in energy". Nixon vowed to lead America to self-sufficiency for its energy needs by 1980. The drill-baby-drill oilaholics argued that "it would take too long" to resolve our energy needs and hence no advancements on alternative energy research were made. By 1979, it was President Carter's turn. He again highlighted the dangers of our increasing oil consumption and promised to lead the nation to energy self-sufficiency. Again, the "more oil solves everything" argument won out and nothing was done to address the problem.
Today we import nearly 70% of our oil consumption. Despite the obvious need to accelerate real alternative energy research, oily politicians are still leading the chant - "Our only solution is to drill drill drill." Well baby, baby, baby, when will you ever learn, learn, learn?
Maybe we should take a hint from the Soviets, put our sights on those rabid environmentalists, and nuke the pelicans?
Friday, June 25, 2010
Monday, June 21, 2010
Geograwhat?
Where in the world is Waldo? Okay, let's say he's in the thriving metropolis of Thimphu. Uh, well, where's that? Oh, it's the capital of Bhutan! Really? Um, where's Bhutan? It's in Asia. You DO know where Asia is, don't you?
Depending on your age, the answer is very likely "No".
I have to admit ... as a child, I never did like geography. I can remember learning about maps, climates, some stuff about oceans and coastlines, a little bit on volcanoes and glaciers, various landscapes, a little bit about culture here and there, and of course the names of all fifty States. For the most part, it was rote memorization and didn't engage the interest of a math nerd such as myself.
But even with my laissez-faire approach back then to the subject, I can still name all fifty states (and when I was young, all the capital cities). As a child, I could list out all the nations in South America. I could even name the territories and provinces of Canada. Even now, I remember trivial facts - such as Minnesota being the northern-most state in the contiguous 48-states. You didn't know that? Well, there's a little notch of land in Minnesota that protrudes upwards into Canada. And despite the infestation of poorly drawn maps (even in school hallways), the New England states are in fact all south of the 49th parallel.
Today though, it seems that geographical knowledge is best described by a 75 watt light bulb receiving only 30 watts of juice. American youth are now being called geographically illiterate. In a National Geographic-Roper survey of young adults (ages 18 to 24) in Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Sweden and the United States, Sweden scored highest; Mexico, lowest. The U.S. was next to last.
Many other reports in recent years demonstrate just how bad things have gotten. In another survey of young adults in the US, one-third of them could not locate the Pacific Ocean on a map. Not being able to locate Bhutan or Gabon is understandable, but the Pacific Ocean is kind of big, isn't it? You know, just look for that big blue splotch on the map? No, no, not that one. That's Lake Superior. Maybe you should look for something a bit bigger?
Fewer than half of the kids tested could locate France or Japan. Fewer than half were able to identify the states New York or Ohio on a map. And when shown a map of the world, 11% of them couldn't find the United States of America! Think about it … we’re talking about people who can vote in this country … but can’t even find it!
In another study, 88% of young adults could not locate Afghanistan, 75% could not identify Iran or Israel on the globe, and 63% could not locate Iraq or Saudi Arabia on a map. And when discussing the ruin left behind by hurricane Katrina, only 66% of young adults could locate Louisiana on a map. When asked where Vietnam is, almost half of those surveyed said it was in South America. Many of them couldn’t even tell you why Vietnam was of particular interest. Uh … maybe a war?
But a healthy percentage of them could tell you that the island in the 2001 TV show “Survivor” was in the South Pacific.
The problem goes further than just reading maps. The majority of incoming freshmen at colleges in the US know the Berlin Wall and U2 only as rock groups. Avatars are well known among youth, but have nothing to do with Hindu deities. Students know that birds fly south for the winter. When asked what birds do in the southern hemisphere, the answer (albeit sad) is not surprising … they fly south! Yeah, like to Antarctica?
While most young adults can point out where China is, when asked what language is primarily spoken in China, 75% said English. Told they could escape an approaching storm by evacuating to the northwest, only two-thirds could indicate which way northwest is on a map. Almost one-third of those surveyed thought that the population of the United States was between one billion and two billion (rather than the correct answer of 300 million).
What is the cause of this outbreak of geographical illiteracy? Some claim that today's self-absorbed nationalistic attitude of our government is the primary cause. If this were so, you’d think more students could find the US on a map. What is known is that for many students, geography rates as their least favorite subject in school. Considering how much people hate math, that's really saying something.
But maybe I’m looking at this the wrong way. Less than 30% of young adults were able to locate New Jersey on a map. I've lived in New Jersey, so I can truthfully say that having our young adults be geographically illiterate might actually have some benefits.
Depending on your age, the answer is very likely "No".
I have to admit ... as a child, I never did like geography. I can remember learning about maps, climates, some stuff about oceans and coastlines, a little bit on volcanoes and glaciers, various landscapes, a little bit about culture here and there, and of course the names of all fifty States. For the most part, it was rote memorization and didn't engage the interest of a math nerd such as myself.
But even with my laissez-faire approach back then to the subject, I can still name all fifty states (and when I was young, all the capital cities). As a child, I could list out all the nations in South America. I could even name the territories and provinces of Canada. Even now, I remember trivial facts - such as Minnesota being the northern-most state in the contiguous 48-states. You didn't know that? Well, there's a little notch of land in Minnesota that protrudes upwards into Canada. And despite the infestation of poorly drawn maps (even in school hallways), the New England states are in fact all south of the 49th parallel.
Today though, it seems that geographical knowledge is best described by a 75 watt light bulb receiving only 30 watts of juice. American youth are now being called geographically illiterate. In a National Geographic-Roper survey of young adults (ages 18 to 24) in Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Sweden and the United States, Sweden scored highest; Mexico, lowest. The U.S. was next to last.
Many other reports in recent years demonstrate just how bad things have gotten. In another survey of young adults in the US, one-third of them could not locate the Pacific Ocean on a map. Not being able to locate Bhutan or Gabon is understandable, but the Pacific Ocean is kind of big, isn't it? You know, just look for that big blue splotch on the map? No, no, not that one. That's Lake Superior. Maybe you should look for something a bit bigger?
Fewer than half of the kids tested could locate France or Japan. Fewer than half were able to identify the states New York or Ohio on a map. And when shown a map of the world, 11% of them couldn't find the United States of America! Think about it … we’re talking about people who can vote in this country … but can’t even find it!
In another study, 88% of young adults could not locate Afghanistan, 75% could not identify Iran or Israel on the globe, and 63% could not locate Iraq or Saudi Arabia on a map. And when discussing the ruin left behind by hurricane Katrina, only 66% of young adults could locate Louisiana on a map. When asked where Vietnam is, almost half of those surveyed said it was in South America. Many of them couldn’t even tell you why Vietnam was of particular interest. Uh … maybe a war?
But a healthy percentage of them could tell you that the island in the 2001 TV show “Survivor” was in the South Pacific.
The problem goes further than just reading maps. The majority of incoming freshmen at colleges in the US know the Berlin Wall and U2 only as rock groups. Avatars are well known among youth, but have nothing to do with Hindu deities. Students know that birds fly south for the winter. When asked what birds do in the southern hemisphere, the answer (albeit sad) is not surprising … they fly south! Yeah, like to Antarctica?
While most young adults can point out where China is, when asked what language is primarily spoken in China, 75% said English. Told they could escape an approaching storm by evacuating to the northwest, only two-thirds could indicate which way northwest is on a map. Almost one-third of those surveyed thought that the population of the United States was between one billion and two billion (rather than the correct answer of 300 million).
What is the cause of this outbreak of geographical illiteracy? Some claim that today's self-absorbed nationalistic attitude of our government is the primary cause. If this were so, you’d think more students could find the US on a map. What is known is that for many students, geography rates as their least favorite subject in school. Considering how much people hate math, that's really saying something.
But maybe I’m looking at this the wrong way. Less than 30% of young adults were able to locate New Jersey on a map. I've lived in New Jersey, so I can truthfully say that having our young adults be geographically illiterate might actually have some benefits.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
99 Makes Common Cents
Back in the late 1800s, some marketing genius discovered that glass wasn't the only transparent thing made by man. He noticed that the number '9' was also transparent, in fact virtually invisible, and hence was born the trailing invisible nines. I'm talking about the ubiquitous nines thrown at us in one of the most nefarious pricing strategies ever conceived.
A gallon of milk costs $2.99. A roasted chicken costs $5.99. A pound of Vermont apple smoked bacon runs $12.99. Ah ha, you didn't even see those 9's, did you?
The "save a penny spend a dollar" mentality is not limited to jars of peanut butter or video rentals. Dell's XPS computer starts at $1599. You can upgrade to the i7-980X processor for an additional $999. Then you can add a Mini 1010 netbook for the bargain price of $199.
Interested in a 46" HDTV LCD TV? It's only $2999.99. A NordicTrack AudioStrider - $999.99. That 80GB iPod your kid wants? Hey, it's below $350! Yes ... $349.99.
Walk through grocery and department stores and your retina is saturated with nines. Potato chips - $1.99 , Tomato Sauce - $2.49 , Greek Yogurt - $3.99 , Levi Jeans - $19.99 , Dog Collar - $12.99 ... If nines could fight disease, the entire world would be cured during a single shopping trip. Nines are ubiquitous (by the way, that's a great word for those prepping for the SATs).
That marketing guy understood how we think in numbers. $246.30 ... $275.82 ... $291.40 ... $299.99 ... they're all "two hundred something". And it's all those 'somethings' that kill your paycheck at the end of the month.
When we buy that DVD recorder for $99.99 ... we feel good. We know in our hearts that it's really $100, but somehow, it feels better. It's less than $100! It must be the left side of our brains arguing with the right side of our brains (in my case, both sides usually lose the argument). And so we've endured the ridicule of invisible nines our entire lives. Whether it's a candy bar for 59 cents or a sweater for $29.99, our eyes somehow manage to avert the nines and we go on living with that slightly better feeling ... and a slightly lighter wallet than we might expect. About nine something lighter.
But the ultimate insult comes at the gas pump. Gasoline is currently running about $2.79 a gallon. Well actually, $2.79 and 9/10ths of a cent. As if paying $2.79 isn't punishment enough, someone out there gets their jollies watching us pay that extra 0.9 cents per gallon. I'm still trying to figure out where to invest that 1/10th of a penny savings.
The fact is, we're not saving anything. That innocuous 9/10ths of a cent adds up. America consumes 380 million gallons of gasoline every day. Adding 0.9 cents to the price adds a hidden $1.3 Billion a year at the pump. (Don't you just hate math?)
So who is the real villain in this story? Well, my theory is that it's all Abe's fault. Yeah, I'm talking about the penny. That innocent little copper-looking coin (in 1982, the composition went from 95% copper to 97.5% zinc) is the culprit to all our suffering! If not for the penny, maybe we wouldn't have to deal with all those nasty nugatory nettlesome nines.
The US Mint produces billions of pennies each year, to date nearly 300 billion of them. Lined up edge to edge, they would circle the earth 137 times. The most disturbing fact is that it costs 1.7 cents to manufacture and distribute one penny. The government loses tens of millions of dollars each year just making these trinkets. Only the US government could manage to lose money by making money!
Of course, if pennies were to disappear, another marketing genius would quickly discover the power of the invisible nickel. That 46" HDTV LCD TV's price would drop from $2999.99 to $2999.95.
Worse yet, we would no longer be able to give anyone our two cents. So ... a nickel for your thoughts?
A gallon of milk costs $2.99. A roasted chicken costs $5.99. A pound of Vermont apple smoked bacon runs $12.99. Ah ha, you didn't even see those 9's, did you?
The "save a penny spend a dollar" mentality is not limited to jars of peanut butter or video rentals. Dell's XPS computer starts at $1599. You can upgrade to the i7-980X processor for an additional $999. Then you can add a Mini 1010 netbook for the bargain price of $199.
Interested in a 46" HDTV LCD TV? It's only $2999.99. A NordicTrack AudioStrider - $999.99. That 80GB iPod your kid wants? Hey, it's below $350! Yes ... $349.99.
Walk through grocery and department stores and your retina is saturated with nines. Potato chips - $1.99 , Tomato Sauce - $2.49 , Greek Yogurt - $3.99 , Levi Jeans - $19.99 , Dog Collar - $12.99 ... If nines could fight disease, the entire world would be cured during a single shopping trip. Nines are ubiquitous (by the way, that's a great word for those prepping for the SATs).
That marketing guy understood how we think in numbers. $246.30 ... $275.82 ... $291.40 ... $299.99 ... they're all "two hundred something". And it's all those 'somethings' that kill your paycheck at the end of the month.
When we buy that DVD recorder for $99.99 ... we feel good. We know in our hearts that it's really $100, but somehow, it feels better. It's less than $100! It must be the left side of our brains arguing with the right side of our brains (in my case, both sides usually lose the argument). And so we've endured the ridicule of invisible nines our entire lives. Whether it's a candy bar for 59 cents or a sweater for $29.99, our eyes somehow manage to avert the nines and we go on living with that slightly better feeling ... and a slightly lighter wallet than we might expect. About nine something lighter.
But the ultimate insult comes at the gas pump. Gasoline is currently running about $2.79 a gallon. Well actually, $2.79 and 9/10ths of a cent. As if paying $2.79 isn't punishment enough, someone out there gets their jollies watching us pay that extra 0.9 cents per gallon. I'm still trying to figure out where to invest that 1/10th of a penny savings.
The fact is, we're not saving anything. That innocuous 9/10ths of a cent adds up. America consumes 380 million gallons of gasoline every day. Adding 0.9 cents to the price adds a hidden $1.3 Billion a year at the pump. (Don't you just hate math?)
So who is the real villain in this story? Well, my theory is that it's all Abe's fault. Yeah, I'm talking about the penny. That innocent little copper-looking coin (in 1982, the composition went from 95% copper to 97.5% zinc) is the culprit to all our suffering! If not for the penny, maybe we wouldn't have to deal with all those nasty nugatory nettlesome nines.
The US Mint produces billions of pennies each year, to date nearly 300 billion of them. Lined up edge to edge, they would circle the earth 137 times. The most disturbing fact is that it costs 1.7 cents to manufacture and distribute one penny. The government loses tens of millions of dollars each year just making these trinkets. Only the US government could manage to lose money by making money!
Of course, if pennies were to disappear, another marketing genius would quickly discover the power of the invisible nickel. That 46" HDTV LCD TV's price would drop from $2999.99 to $2999.95.
Worse yet, we would no longer be able to give anyone our two cents. So ... a nickel for your thoughts?
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Triskaidekatwinkia
Twelve trillion bottles of beer on the wall, twelve trillion bottles of beer ... You take one down and toss it around ... and before you know it, you'll see thirteen trillion bottles up there! No no no, I shouldn't use beer in this analogy. The last thing I would ever want to do is badmouth beer! What I wanted to talk about is dollars and yes, the nearly inconceivable has happened again. Our National Debt has hit yet another trillion dollar mark. As news stations continued to focus on the Gulf oil spill, violence in the Gaza, and mounting tensions between North and South Korea, our National Debt quietly crept over $13 Trillion.
Thirteen trillion. That's a big number, and much bigger when you are talking dollars. Then again, the dollar isn't what it used to be. If the world market continues to deteriorate, we might be able to barter off that debt for a small chest of trinkets and a few cases of cigarettes.
Anyway, as I've said before, a trillion is a big number. I know that it gets tiring to hear about this, so maybe I should only rant about the National Debt every time we hit another trillion dollar mark. Of course, that's getting more and more common these days.
The real problem with the National Debt is that it's so big, it's no longer scary. It's kind of like comparing the sun to a volcanic eruption. Volcanoes can be pretty terrifying, but who's afraid of the sun? Sure, it's 800,000 miles wide and those cute little solar flares up there can be equivalent to twenty million atomic bombs. But who's afraid of a solar flare?
It seems that twelve zeroes numb the brain. A trillion (1000000000000) is a million million, or a thousand billion. These numbers mean nothing to the average person. A billion? Isn't that what we spend in Iraq every three days? So what? Well, a billion one dollar bills would be a stack about 68 miles high. A trillion pennies would form a copper cube over 1/2 mile wide. A trillion seconds is about 32,000 years.
Scary? No, of course not. Well, that's okay. Most people can barely comprehend a thousand, much less a million million. It's hard to be afraid of a bunch of zeroes. The human brain just isn't equipped to handle numbers like thirteen trillion. After all, the National Debt is over twice the number of brain cells in your head. Maybe we should just be happy we don't have bigger brains?
Okay, so pennies and dollars don't quite cut it. How about something our brains are designed to comprehend better? You know, like perhaps ... Twinkies? Yeah, let's look at thirteen trillion Twinkies.
The Hostess Company bakes 500,000,000 Twinkies a year, so it would take you 26,000 years to bake thirteen trillion. A thirteen trillion pound Twinkie would be 3 1/2 miles long. Thirteen trillion Twinkies would cover a football field with a 184 mile high creme-filled sponge. If you ate 100 Twinkies every second of the day, it would take you over 4000 years to get through those thirteen trillion Twinkies.
Think about it ... a National Debt of 13 Trillion Twinkies! That's 53 times more than the total number of burgers sold by McDonalds in the past 70 years.
Perhaps this is a better way to get people's attention. Would people be bothered by a debt of 13 Trillion Twinkies? Would it bother you to know that every man, woman and child in the United States owes the government 42,000 Twinkies? You have three kids? Well then, your family owes the government 210,000 Twinkies. Are you ready to start baking?
So what's the solution? Or indeed, is there a solution? Does this country have the fortitude (or sugar tooth) required to fight off 13 Trillion Twinkies?
Triskaidekaphobia is the fear of the number 13. Perhaps being in debt for 13,131,313,131,313 Twinkies would do the trick for most people? If that's not scary enough, then let's just wait until we hit 14 Trillion. Maybe I should then write about fourteen trillion White Castle burgers?
Thirteen trillion. That's a big number, and much bigger when you are talking dollars. Then again, the dollar isn't what it used to be. If the world market continues to deteriorate, we might be able to barter off that debt for a small chest of trinkets and a few cases of cigarettes.
Anyway, as I've said before, a trillion is a big number. I know that it gets tiring to hear about this, so maybe I should only rant about the National Debt every time we hit another trillion dollar mark. Of course, that's getting more and more common these days.
The real problem with the National Debt is that it's so big, it's no longer scary. It's kind of like comparing the sun to a volcanic eruption. Volcanoes can be pretty terrifying, but who's afraid of the sun? Sure, it's 800,000 miles wide and those cute little solar flares up there can be equivalent to twenty million atomic bombs. But who's afraid of a solar flare?
It seems that twelve zeroes numb the brain. A trillion (1000000000000) is a million million, or a thousand billion. These numbers mean nothing to the average person. A billion? Isn't that what we spend in Iraq every three days? So what? Well, a billion one dollar bills would be a stack about 68 miles high. A trillion pennies would form a copper cube over 1/2 mile wide. A trillion seconds is about 32,000 years.
Scary? No, of course not. Well, that's okay. Most people can barely comprehend a thousand, much less a million million. It's hard to be afraid of a bunch of zeroes. The human brain just isn't equipped to handle numbers like thirteen trillion. After all, the National Debt is over twice the number of brain cells in your head. Maybe we should just be happy we don't have bigger brains?
Okay, so pennies and dollars don't quite cut it. How about something our brains are designed to comprehend better? You know, like perhaps ... Twinkies? Yeah, let's look at thirteen trillion Twinkies.
The Hostess Company bakes 500,000,000 Twinkies a year, so it would take you 26,000 years to bake thirteen trillion. A thirteen trillion pound Twinkie would be 3 1/2 miles long. Thirteen trillion Twinkies would cover a football field with a 184 mile high creme-filled sponge. If you ate 100 Twinkies every second of the day, it would take you over 4000 years to get through those thirteen trillion Twinkies.
Think about it ... a National Debt of 13 Trillion Twinkies! That's 53 times more than the total number of burgers sold by McDonalds in the past 70 years.
Perhaps this is a better way to get people's attention. Would people be bothered by a debt of 13 Trillion Twinkies? Would it bother you to know that every man, woman and child in the United States owes the government 42,000 Twinkies? You have three kids? Well then, your family owes the government 210,000 Twinkies. Are you ready to start baking?
So what's the solution? Or indeed, is there a solution? Does this country have the fortitude (or sugar tooth) required to fight off 13 Trillion Twinkies?
Triskaidekaphobia is the fear of the number 13. Perhaps being in debt for 13,131,313,131,313 Twinkies would do the trick for most people? If that's not scary enough, then let's just wait until we hit 14 Trillion. Maybe I should then write about fourteen trillion White Castle burgers?
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Bracing the Walls of D.C.
There was a homeowner who wanted to rid his house of roaches. A friend suggested using an aerosol spray called a "roach bomb". You put the can in a room and turn it on (activating a continuous spray), exit the room, and let the fumes seek out and bomb the little critters. The homeowner thought it over ..... if one bomb per room is good, several bombs per room is better! He bought a couple cases of roach bombs, set off several aerosols in each room, and ran out of the house.
Slowly, the house filled up with the mist ... the flammable mist ... the flammable mist that eventually found the stove's pilot light. Yeah, the house exploded. But it has to make you wonder ... Did it kill the roaches?
Okay, I didn't really want to discuss blowing up houses. Quite the converse, I wanted to talk about what it takes to hold one together.
Most people think that the walls of a house support the ceiling. That's true of course, but equally true is the fact that the ceiling supports the walls. If not for the ceiling providing stability, the walls would come crashing down. So here's the question ... just how high can you build a wall? Is there a theoretical limit to how high the ceiling can be?
Senator Lamar Alexander, one of the great architects (deep, very deep) in the bowels of Washington D.C. has an issue with ceilings. Earlier this year, the Senator led the opposition against Congress' efforts to raise the national debt limit (the ceiling defining how much the government can spend). What confused me is why the Senator felt this was an issue ... that is, why an issue "now".
As Governor of Tennessee, Alexander didn't mind Reagan raising that ceiling, nor raising the National Debt from $800 Billion to $2.4 Trillion. As Secretary of Education under Bush Sr., Alexander again did not object. The National Debt rose another $1.6 Trillion. Even under Clinton, he didn't object ... and the National Debt increased another $1.6 Trillion.
And as a Senator during Bush Jr.'s administration, Alexander didn't object to raising the ceiling multiple times, raising the National Debt $4.6 Trillion (nearly doubling it). But now, now he feels that those walls are in danger of crumbling and warned against raising the ceiling again.
As much as I dislike the hypocritical cretin, I do agree with him. The ceiling isn't supporting anything. It's far too high and the walls are made out of defective imported Chinese drywall. With all Republicans voting "No", Congress did raise the limit by $1.9 trillion, putting the new ceiling at a stratospheric $14.3 trillion.
Well, I'm a betting man. I'm challenging anyone to place a bet with me.
When the Republicans take back control of the White House, I bet they won't reverse the spending trend. I bet that those walls will go even higher. I bet that the Republicans, Senator Alexander included, will develop fiscal amnesia and that the discussion of voting against ceiling limits will not cross their lips.
No, no, no ... I'm not trashing the Republicans. I'm trashing the Republicans and the Democrats. They're two of a kind, dysfunctional twins from the same broken mold. Whether it's spend and tax or spend and borrow, it has the same common denominator ... spending. There just doesn't seem to be any way to stop these guys from building those walls higher and higher and higher.
So now we have a $14.3 Trillion ceiling. Imagine 14.3 trillion sugar cubes stacked up in a single pile. That stack would go further than the distance to the sun! How blinding is that sweet analogy?
Perhaps there isn't any solution to this problem, at least not one that Alexander and his friends are capable of or willing to propose. But I'm willing to help them. I'm thinking that it might do some good if we send a few hundred thousand cases of roach bombs to Washington D.C.. I'm sure there must be a pilot light somewhere over there.
Slowly, the house filled up with the mist ... the flammable mist ... the flammable mist that eventually found the stove's pilot light. Yeah, the house exploded. But it has to make you wonder ... Did it kill the roaches?
Okay, I didn't really want to discuss blowing up houses. Quite the converse, I wanted to talk about what it takes to hold one together.
Most people think that the walls of a house support the ceiling. That's true of course, but equally true is the fact that the ceiling supports the walls. If not for the ceiling providing stability, the walls would come crashing down. So here's the question ... just how high can you build a wall? Is there a theoretical limit to how high the ceiling can be?
Senator Lamar Alexander, one of the great architects (deep, very deep) in the bowels of Washington D.C. has an issue with ceilings. Earlier this year, the Senator led the opposition against Congress' efforts to raise the national debt limit (the ceiling defining how much the government can spend). What confused me is why the Senator felt this was an issue ... that is, why an issue "now".
As Governor of Tennessee, Alexander didn't mind Reagan raising that ceiling, nor raising the National Debt from $800 Billion to $2.4 Trillion. As Secretary of Education under Bush Sr., Alexander again did not object. The National Debt rose another $1.6 Trillion. Even under Clinton, he didn't object ... and the National Debt increased another $1.6 Trillion.
And as a Senator during Bush Jr.'s administration, Alexander didn't object to raising the ceiling multiple times, raising the National Debt $4.6 Trillion (nearly doubling it). But now, now he feels that those walls are in danger of crumbling and warned against raising the ceiling again.
As much as I dislike the hypocritical cretin, I do agree with him. The ceiling isn't supporting anything. It's far too high and the walls are made out of defective imported Chinese drywall. With all Republicans voting "No", Congress did raise the limit by $1.9 trillion, putting the new ceiling at a stratospheric $14.3 trillion.
Well, I'm a betting man. I'm challenging anyone to place a bet with me.
When the Republicans take back control of the White House, I bet they won't reverse the spending trend. I bet that those walls will go even higher. I bet that the Republicans, Senator Alexander included, will develop fiscal amnesia and that the discussion of voting against ceiling limits will not cross their lips.
No, no, no ... I'm not trashing the Republicans. I'm trashing the Republicans and the Democrats. They're two of a kind, dysfunctional twins from the same broken mold. Whether it's spend and tax or spend and borrow, it has the same common denominator ... spending. There just doesn't seem to be any way to stop these guys from building those walls higher and higher and higher.
So now we have a $14.3 Trillion ceiling. Imagine 14.3 trillion sugar cubes stacked up in a single pile. That stack would go further than the distance to the sun! How blinding is that sweet analogy?
Perhaps there isn't any solution to this problem, at least not one that Alexander and his friends are capable of or willing to propose. But I'm willing to help them. I'm thinking that it might do some good if we send a few hundred thousand cases of roach bombs to Washington D.C.. I'm sure there must be a pilot light somewhere over there.
Can We Talk?
A man I've known for many years recently told me that he no longer wants to have anything to do with me. He accused "my kind" of being responsible for the 50 million deaths incurred during WWII, the turmoil we endured from the Cold War, the over 50,000 deaths during the Vietnam War, the collapse of America's moral infrastructure, the decline of the nuclear family, and finally for the 9/11 attack. He summarized his explosive outburst by telling me that he was sick of my "anti-American pacifist left wing liberal hippie drivel". I found this type-casting very strange indeed. I mean, I don't even own a tie-dye shirt.
Granted, this man and I were never drinking buddies, but we were always able to civilly discuss any subject, no matter how controversial. In poetic terms of how I was taught to argue, we always agreed to agreeably disagree. Our differences on politics had little to do with our personal feelings towards each other.
But when I brought up the subject of bringing our troops home fromIraq
Another person I know is angry at me for my stance on firearms. Well, angry doesn’t quite describe his feeling. Irate, furious, enraged … where’s my Thesaurus? He thinks I’ve lost my mind when I tell him that I support the right to bear arms. How liberal can I be if I want criminals freely roaming the streets with grenade launchers, right?
Our nation has always been one of outspoken opinions. The myth of the great silent majority always made me laugh. Where exactly were all those silent people hiding? Since its inception, this country has fostered strong opinions and has nurtured debate. As they said in Colonial days, a healthy debate a day keeps the King away.
But times have changed. Now, you’re either for the war or you’re for the terrorists. You either support a woman’s right to choose or you want all women barefoot and pregnant. You either want to build a wall on the Mexican border or you want to open up a store selling welcome mats for illegal aliens. It's here or there, in or out, the good guys or the bad guys. You're either for us or against us!
The lines drawn between opposing sides on every issue are becoming ridiculously thin, allowing no middle ground whatsoever. Whatever happened to enjoying a good debate? What would Lincoln and Douglas have done if they could only speak to people who already agreed with their side of an issue?
Hubert H. Humphrey once said, “Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, dissent, and debate.” This is long past wisdom and now words are used specifically to divide rather than unite our country. Consider the naming of the “Patriot Act”. What does it say about you if you are against it? Clearly, you are not a patriot! You hateAmerica
Perhaps the problem stems from the fact that our leaders aren’t particularly good at listening and they’re even worse at talking. When President Bush is stumbling through a sentence, I find myself yelling at the television set – “Use a verb!”
So anyway, what’s the problem? Why can’t we discuss those things we disagree on without it becoming a personal attack? Why has it become so un-American to disagree? Freedom of speech has little value if you’re only free to speak in unison.
Can we talk? Or more importantly, can we listen? Talking is easy enough, but listening to someone else talk can be difficult, even painful at times. And yet, this is the most important of all American virtues. How else can we agree to disagree is we don't first listen so as to know what it is we're debating about? This nation has been happily debating for over 230 years now and we still don't have a King, so there's good evidence that it does indeed work.
So remember to drink three glasses a milk a day, exercise regularly, eat plenty of fiber, brush your teeth after every meal, and never turn away from a good debate.
Well, I'd like to talk some more, but some of my neighbors are shouting something to me and I have to close the window. I really don't want to hear what they have to say.
Granted, this man and I were never drinking buddies, but we were always able to civilly discuss any subject, no matter how controversial. In poetic terms of how I was taught to argue, we always agreed to agreeably disagree. Our differences on politics had little to do with our personal feelings towards each other.
But when I brought up the subject of bringing our troops home from
Another person I know is angry at me for my stance on firearms. Well, angry doesn’t quite describe his feeling. Irate, furious, enraged … where’s my Thesaurus? He thinks I’ve lost my mind when I tell him that I support the right to bear arms. How liberal can I be if I want criminals freely roaming the streets with grenade launchers, right?
Our nation has always been one of outspoken opinions. The myth of the great silent majority always made me laugh. Where exactly were all those silent people hiding? Since its inception, this country has fostered strong opinions and has nurtured debate. As they said in Colonial days, a healthy debate a day keeps the King away.
But times have changed. Now, you’re either for the war or you’re for the terrorists. You either support a woman’s right to choose or you want all women barefoot and pregnant. You either want to build a wall on the Mexican border or you want to open up a store selling welcome mats for illegal aliens. It's here or there, in or out, the good guys or the bad guys. You're either for us or against us!
The lines drawn between opposing sides on every issue are becoming ridiculously thin, allowing no middle ground whatsoever. Whatever happened to enjoying a good debate? What would Lincoln and Douglas have done if they could only speak to people who already agreed with their side of an issue?
Hubert H. Humphrey once said, “Freedom is hammered out on the anvil of discussion, dissent, and debate.” This is long past wisdom and now words are used specifically to divide rather than unite our country. Consider the naming of the “Patriot Act”. What does it say about you if you are against it? Clearly, you are not a patriot! You hate
Perhaps the problem stems from the fact that our leaders aren’t particularly good at listening and they’re even worse at talking. When President Bush is stumbling through a sentence, I find myself yelling at the television set – “Use a verb!”
So anyway, what’s the problem? Why can’t we discuss those things we disagree on without it becoming a personal attack? Why has it become so un-American to disagree? Freedom of speech has little value if you’re only free to speak in unison.
Can we talk? Or more importantly, can we listen? Talking is easy enough, but listening to someone else talk can be difficult, even painful at times. And yet, this is the most important of all American virtues. How else can we agree to disagree is we don't first listen so as to know what it is we're debating about? This nation has been happily debating for over 230 years now and we still don't have a King, so there's good evidence that it does indeed work.
So remember to drink three glasses a milk a day, exercise regularly, eat plenty of fiber, brush your teeth after every meal, and never turn away from a good debate.
Well, I'd like to talk some more, but some of my neighbors are shouting something to me and I have to close the window. I really don't want to hear what they have to say.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Your mother has a smooth forehead!
Back when I worked at Bell Labs, we brought in a candidate for an opening on our database team. Upon reviewing his resume, I couldn't understand why my interview team had selected him for an interview. The guy had no relevant experience and his degree was in chemistry, not computer science. Well, it turns out that he had put "Klingon" on his resume as a foreign language in which he was fluent. (Klingons are a warrior race in the 24th century, kind of a cross between an iguana and Dick Cheney) My team simply couldn't resist interviewing someone who knew what "Heghlu'meH QaQ jajvam" meant.
Not surprisingly, when the man discovered why he had been invited in, the interview went south. He was visibly upset and as he was leaving, he scowled at my team leader and said "Your mother has a smooth forehead!" Although he said it in English, I learned later that this was considered the worst possible insult a Klingon could utter. Fortunately, he didn't have a Bat'leth on him.
With the school year over, you might find yourself looking for ways to keep your kid busy. An all-time favorite option is summer camp. When I was a kid, this meant spending a few weeks learning how to paddle a canoe, learning how to build a camp fire, and learning the correct way to apply poison ivy medication. But today, one can send their kid to camp for just about anything imaginable. Computer camps. Carpentry camps. Cooking camps. And yeah, there are summer camps that will teach your kid how to speak Klingon. Jol yIchu', Scotty! (Beam me up)
If you're not interested in having Junior learn a new language (especially one that won't exist for another couple hundred years), how about a music camp? You can send your kid to Camp Jam, a rockin' camp run by Jeff Carlisis, lead guitarist of the 38 Specials. Do you have twins? Send them to a barbershop quartet camp (they can be half the group). You can even send your kids to a hip-hop camp where they can master the fundamentals of break dancing, rapping ... and as an added "bonus", they even learn how to spray paint graffiti. Now there's a job they'll never outsource!
Camps with horseback riding, swimming, hiking ... no, that's all passé now. Today, it's camps for nude volleyball (actually, I've never seen a volleyball dressed), paleontology (fossil digs for young dino-lovers), juggling camps, and camps that teach how to write comic books.
Do your kids like to clown around? Then send them to Circus Camp. They'll live under the big top with performers from Ringling Bros. and the Moscow State Circus who will teach them how to ride a unicycle, how to throw custard pies (I throw pi around in my class all the time), and how to apply greasepaint. At the very least, they'll come back home knowing a few good jokes.
Got a few sneaky types in the family? Send them to Spy Camp. Your child will learn stealth and surveillance techniques, undercover procedures, code breaking, and far more important for survival in the city ... paintball combat strategies.
Maybe your kids would enjoy a summer at Forensics Camp. They'll learn how to detect and collect evidence (fingerprints, hairs, fibers, footprints) and apply diagnostic testing for analyzing various crimes. This could prove very useful if your neighbor's kid went to that hip hop camp and you suddenly find your car vandalized.
There's Anime summer camps for kids who like to draw cartoon girls with ten-inch waists and fifty-inch breasts. Avatar camps for kids who like to draw characters that look like a cross between Lyle Lovett and a tarsier.
Summer camps for scuba diving, robotics, surfing, puppeteering, rug making, and even ones that teach you how to become a stunt double in Hollywood. Got a young Ralph Lauren or Donatella Versace in the family? Send them to Fashion summer camp. There even a screenwriting summer camp.
We might just find ourselves at the Little Theater watching your kid's play entitled "How my parents tortured me at summer camp."
Not surprisingly, when the man discovered why he had been invited in, the interview went south. He was visibly upset and as he was leaving, he scowled at my team leader and said "Your mother has a smooth forehead!" Although he said it in English, I learned later that this was considered the worst possible insult a Klingon could utter. Fortunately, he didn't have a Bat'leth on him.
With the school year over, you might find yourself looking for ways to keep your kid busy. An all-time favorite option is summer camp. When I was a kid, this meant spending a few weeks learning how to paddle a canoe, learning how to build a camp fire, and learning the correct way to apply poison ivy medication. But today, one can send their kid to camp for just about anything imaginable. Computer camps. Carpentry camps. Cooking camps. And yeah, there are summer camps that will teach your kid how to speak Klingon. Jol yIchu', Scotty! (Beam me up)
If you're not interested in having Junior learn a new language (especially one that won't exist for another couple hundred years), how about a music camp? You can send your kid to Camp Jam, a rockin' camp run by Jeff Carlisis, lead guitarist of the 38 Specials. Do you have twins? Send them to a barbershop quartet camp (they can be half the group). You can even send your kids to a hip-hop camp where they can master the fundamentals of break dancing, rapping ... and as an added "bonus", they even learn how to spray paint graffiti. Now there's a job they'll never outsource!
Camps with horseback riding, swimming, hiking ... no, that's all passé now. Today, it's camps for nude volleyball (actually, I've never seen a volleyball dressed), paleontology (fossil digs for young dino-lovers), juggling camps, and camps that teach how to write comic books.
Do your kids like to clown around? Then send them to Circus Camp. They'll live under the big top with performers from Ringling Bros. and the Moscow State Circus who will teach them how to ride a unicycle, how to throw custard pies (I throw pi around in my class all the time), and how to apply greasepaint. At the very least, they'll come back home knowing a few good jokes.
Got a few sneaky types in the family? Send them to Spy Camp. Your child will learn stealth and surveillance techniques, undercover procedures, code breaking, and far more important for survival in the city ... paintball combat strategies.
Maybe your kids would enjoy a summer at Forensics Camp. They'll learn how to detect and collect evidence (fingerprints, hairs, fibers, footprints) and apply diagnostic testing for analyzing various crimes. This could prove very useful if your neighbor's kid went to that hip hop camp and you suddenly find your car vandalized.
There's Anime summer camps for kids who like to draw cartoon girls with ten-inch waists and fifty-inch breasts. Avatar camps for kids who like to draw characters that look like a cross between Lyle Lovett and a tarsier.
Summer camps for scuba diving, robotics, surfing, puppeteering, rug making, and even ones that teach you how to become a stunt double in Hollywood. Got a young Ralph Lauren or Donatella Versace in the family? Send them to Fashion summer camp. There even a screenwriting summer camp.
We might just find ourselves at the Little Theater watching your kid's play entitled "How my parents tortured me at summer camp."
Digressing to make a point
Okay, so this is my first entry and I'm not trying to make anything look pretty. In fact, how things "look" is often the very subject of what I write about. It's the age-old tale of form versus function, though I wouldn't want to infer that anything I write has any function in the real world.
Anyway, "But I Digress" is my weekly column in the Los Alamos Monitor. I chose the name to underscore that harping about any one subject over and over should be against the law. Of course, there are talking mouths out there (I hesitate to call them talking heads) who get paid millions to ramble on about the two or three subjects that they pretend to understand. We expect the same from all sorts of venues ... politicians, local community boards, committees, so-called leaders ... people whom we empower to rant about nothing.-
See what I mean? I'm digressing. It's human nature. My problem is that I often listen to myself when I'm talking. That in itself is a great motivator to change the subject.
I hope you enjoy my blogged column. Please comment and don't hold back. If what I say bothers you, then what better evidence that you're listening?
Anyway, "But I Digress" is my weekly column in the Los Alamos Monitor. I chose the name to underscore that harping about any one subject over and over should be against the law. Of course, there are talking mouths out there (I hesitate to call them talking heads) who get paid millions to ramble on about the two or three subjects that they pretend to understand. We expect the same from all sorts of venues ... politicians, local community boards, committees, so-called leaders ... people whom we empower to rant about nothing.-
See what I mean? I'm digressing. It's human nature. My problem is that I often listen to myself when I'm talking. That in itself is a great motivator to change the subject.
I hope you enjoy my blogged column. Please comment and don't hold back. If what I say bothers you, then what better evidence that you're listening?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)