ITEMS WITH THE MOST HITS & MY FAVORITES - II

An eclectic blog (November, 2009, through December, 2012) with sections on Biography, Commentary (General, Economics and Investing), Fiction, Health Care, Oil and Gas, Politics, Photographs, and Poetry (Children's Poems, General, Health, and Space Poems): http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2011/07/reunite-gondwanaland-2009-june-2011.html  As of the end of 2012, the blog contains 200 items.

The items with the most hits continue to be: You Are So Lucky (Biographical) with 223 hits [http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2009/11/you-are-so-lucky.html] and Muammar Qadaffi And Me (Biographical) with 213 hits [http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2010/12/muammar-qaddafi-and-me-biographical.html]. The former was no doubt popular because of the Great Japanese Earthquake of 2011 and deals with my first three days in Japan in 1965. The latter was popular because of the overthrow of the Libyan dictator Qadaffi.  As for last year's report, there are six others with 100 to 199 hits , none of which are biographical and all from before 2012.  One came close, however, with 99 hits:  The Salt Content Of Foods from July 7, 2012: http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/08/salt-contents-of-foods.html which was closely followed by The Light from October 13, 2012, a biographical piece with 96 hits: http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=112427639902898514#editor/target=post;postID=6263706723454027302

Each piece I have written is like a child and I love them all, but it is common that some children are loved more than others. My personal favorite continues to be the Effectiveness Of Taxes from May 7, 2010 with 57 hits [http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2010/05/effectiveness-of-taxes.html] followed by Basics of Bureaucracy from July 26, 2011 with 124 hits [http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2011/07/basics-of-bureaucracy.html]. In the former, I point out why decreasing taxes on individuals is an inefficient way to stimulate the economy. I liked this so much that I refer to it in three other pieces. Alas the reading public did not agree as to its great value. In the latter that was written many years ago, I give some real rules of dealing with bureaucrats in a humorous fashion.


Let me give two Honorable Mentions. I wouldn't say this is a favorite of mine, but it can be important to some, i.e. Preferred Stock Investing from November 27, 2011 with 167 hits (picked up about 30 more hits in 2012) [http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2011/11/preferred-stock-investing.html]. I have invested for about 60 years, but never got involved in preferred stocks until the last decade. I would also like to mention one poem Upon the Second Anniversary Of Apollo 11 from January 9, 2010 with only 7 hits, the first landing on the Moon [http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2010/01/upon-second-anniversary-of-apollo-11.html]. Normally a couplet or more just pops into my mind and I construct a poem around it (An example is So How About An Asteroid from July 20, 2011 with 32 hits) that containes my favorite couplet: Who could possiboly be annoyed/About the study of an asteroid. The Second Anniversary of Apollo Eleven, however, was little noticed which I thought was terrible so this was the first time I sat down to compose a poem from scratch.

MASS MURDER WEAPON OF CHOICE

The weapon of choice of mass murderers is clearly a semi-automatic, probably with a large clip of ammunition although they may have multipleweapons.  The Aurora, CO, movie theater gunman used a semi-automatic rifle with a large magazine that jammed or the killings would have been worse, and he also had a semi-automatic pistol.*  As it was 12 people died.  The Wisconsin Sikh Temple shooter used a legally bought semi-automatic pistol and 6 were killed with two others seriously wounded.** The Oregon mall murderer also used a semi-automatic rifle (stolen) that jammed though he got it unjammed - two dead, one seriously wounded.***  The Newtown, CT, murderer used a semi-automatic rife with a large clip stolen from his mother (whom he killed).****  It did not jam and 20 first graders and six school officials were killed.

Incidentally, even in the Columbine, CO, shooting, a semiautomatic weapon was used among other weapons (http://acolumbinesite.com/weapon.html).

Although the outlawing semi-automatic weapons might not reduce the number of mass murder events, it might reduce the size of the killings and woundings.

*  http://www.ibtimes.com/colorado-shooter-what-kind-weapons-did-he-have-729953
** http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/06/us/wisconsin-temple-shooting/index.html; http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/07/us-usa-wisconsin-shooting-weapon-idUSBRE87606820120807
***  http://news.yahoo.com/police-ore-mall-shooter-used-stolen-rifle-181931596.html
****  http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/12/newtown-connecticut-school-shooting/59999/

MASS MURDER, MURDER, AND CULTURE

In the aftermath of the firearm Newtown, CT, massacre, we should remember that the number killed in these massacres per year are dwarfed by the number of gun deaths, suicides, and homicides deaths per year.

Homicides & Suicides As for the number of deaths by homicide in 2010, the total was 15,953 of which 11,078 (11,101 in 2011, preliminary) were by firearms which is 3.6 per 100,000 population.  The number of suicides in 2010 were 38,364 of which 19,392 (19,766 in 2011, preliminary) were by firearms or 6.3/100,000 population.*  For comparison, the number of automobile deaths in 2009 were 34,485.*

Firearm Deaths for U.S. vs. Developed Countries  In total number of firearm deaths, the U.S. ranked number 12 at 9/100,000 population (2011), ahead of such countries as Switzerland 3.5 (2011), France 3.0 (2012), Norway 1.78 (2012), Sweden 1.47 (2012), Germany 1.10 (2012),  Australia 1.05 (2011), United Kingdom 0.25 (2102), and Japan 0.07 (1998).**

Assault Deaths Over Time The murder rate/yr in the U.S. has been actually declining, with a triple peak centered on 1980 with a steep rise from 1965  and a steep decline particularly since 1991, with additional decline since then.***  For comparison, motor vehicle deaths are also declining.****

Discussion  Though I see no reason for people to have assault weapons and semi-automatic weapons in general, our problem in this country is also cultural, our mythic "Wild West" mentality, our deifying the "gunslinger."  We are now a country of more than 300 million people and not the sparsely populated West or yore.  Yet, we live today as if we are more wild than the Wild West probably was.

The large population means that there are going to be more deranged people in a country awash with arms.  Those that commit mass murder ending in their suicide have distinct psychological profiles that are shared, unfortunately, with a lot of people that never commit mass murders (and the profile for school mass murders are different from others).  We may be able to decrease these mass murders because they do some extended planning of weeks or even months that probably are not done in complete isolation; however, with such a large country and such a large population, I doubt we can totally eliminate them.

And do these mass murderers really intend ahead of time to commit suicide?  If so, why do they go to the trouble of procuring and wearing body armor such as at Aurora and Newtown?  It seems as if the suicide may be some afterthought.

And has been shown above, homicides are much, much broader than the mass murders.  Should we concentrate on the mass murderers and learn to live with the others as we do to a great extent with automobile deaths?  I think our cultural problem with the use of firearms is even more important than gun control.

The question of suicide has been dealt with elsewhere in this blog.  See http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/06/suicide.html and http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/07/what-about-8000-others.html  When even the severe wounding of President Reagan and the turning of his press secretary, Brady, into a vegetable by John Hinckley didn't result in any sort of permanent gun control, even on semi-automatic rifles, I guess I have become very cynical about the matter.  In fact the country seems even worse today than it was then in such things as carrying concealed weapons and carrying weapons into national parks and colleges.

* http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm
Suicide was the 10th leading cause of death in 2011 whereas homicide ranked 15th.
** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
*** http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/
**** http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42370348/ns/us_news-life/t/highway-deaths-fall-lowest-level/#.UM5JkNuF8Rk

DEATH PANELS & $716 BILLION FROM MEDICARE

I've never heard it discussed, but I think that Democrats are well concerned about making proposals to cut Medicare.  After all the Democrats had proposed in Section 123 of bill HR 3200 that would have paid physicians for counseling patients about living will, advances directives, and end-of -life care options.  Sarah Palin coined the phrase "death panels" to describe this and said that these panels would judge just how much health care you deserved.  Of those that knew about the claim, 30% said they thought it was true (about 255 of Americans).*  The provision about physicians counseling was removed from the final bill though end-of-life provisions, in particular, are a major expense in Medicare, but political hysteria had set in.  You should read the entire Wikipedia report but just to quote one claim "Rep Virginia Foxx (R-NC) charged that the proposal would 'put seniors in a position of being put to death by their government.'"

There is an Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) that will force cuts in Medicare if inflation in Medicare costs exceeds a certain number.**  These cuts specifically cannot reduce benefits or ration health care (Section 3403 of the health care law), but deal with things like Medicare Advantage costs, physician's reimbursement, hospital reimbursements.  Congress can rescind these cuts, but then must find the savings elsewhere.  This Board has been demagogued too.  Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney claimed that, "In order to bring health care costs down, we don't need to have `15 people telling us what kinds of treatments we should have."  But Romney's falsehood is relatively mild compared to that by others

 IPAB is a change from where a previous panel called MedPac advised the congress on cuts to medical costs, which congress duly ignored.  The panel consists of 15 members appointed by the President subject to Senate confirmation.  It is specified that the president must consult with the leaders of the Senate and House majorities and minorities for the appointment of 3 members each or 12 members total.  The other three members are the Head of HHS, and two health Administrators as non-voting members.  Though these members are not elected (thank heavens for that), they have more scrutiny than Department Secretaries, it seems to me.

Then there is the demogoging the $716 billion in cuts from Medicare, a sum identical to the cuts Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI).  These cuts are expected to extend the life of Medicare for 8 years.  Now in Obamacare, these cuts are used elsewhere to do things like close the "donut hole" in Medicare D, and one might want to use the cuts for other purposes like reducing the Federal deficit, but that was not what was claimed.  It was claimed by various Republicans that the cuts were to reduce benefits to Medicare beneficiaries.  In fact, 30.2% of the cuts involve Medicare Advantage (Medicare-C) that cost 17% more than Medicare-B (and I feel Advantage should be eliminated entirely), 34.8% were to reduce hospital costs (and hospitals agreed to this because of an expected increase in patients under Obamacare), and 35 % for everything else (e.g. insurance cuts, home care provider cuts, uninsured patient cuts to hospitals, etc., about a dozen in all).***  Republicans implied or claimed that this sum would be taken from Medicare benefits, though such was not the case.  Republican candidate for President even claimed he would restore the cuts.

The funny thing is that all these were cuts were made by people that actually want to destroy Medicare.  Paul Ryan wanted to eliminate Medicare in favor of vouchers to people to seek medical insurance.  Besides he still wants to eliminate $716 billion from Medicare.****  But is it any wonder that Democrats are wary of mentioning specific cuts to Medicare?

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_panel
** http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/04/mitt-romney/romney-says-ipab-board-can-tell-people-ultimately-/
*** http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/14/romneys-right-obamacare-cuts-medicare-by-716-billion-heres-how/
**** http://reason.com/blog/2012/12/03/republicans-likely-to-stick-with-medicar

SUSAN RICE & SWEET REVENGE

Susan rice has withdrawn herself from consideration of being Secretary of State.  So John McCain got his revenge for nasty things she is reported to have said about him in the 2008 election process.  Lindsay Graham has gotten revenge for the way John Bolton was treated by Democrats on his appointment as Ambassador to The United Nations.  So now let's hope they are happy and we can go on to more constructive things.

I have no idea whether Susan Rice would have made a good Secretary of State.  From what people say, she would have had to make some personality changes.  Hillary Clinton did it so maybe Susan rice could have done it also.  But for now, looks like she will stay as Ambassador to The Untied Nations.

MICHIGAN POLITICS & RIGHT TO WORK

It may come as a suprise to many people, but Michigan has a long history of voting Republican in spite of the large factory worker population.  In fact, they only started voting Democratic for president with the Clinton presidency in 1992 (http://www.270towin.com/states/Michigan and did vote for President Obama in 2012.  The two Senators from Michigan are the well known Carl Levin and the lesser known Debbie Stabenow, both Democrats and the national Representatives are close with 8 Republicans and 7 Democrats.  Thus in national offices, Michigan is Democratic overall, the state Senate, though, is something else with 26 Republicans and only 12 Democrats to total 38 members.*  The state House of Representatives is almost as one sided with 63 Republicans and 47 Democrats to total 110 members.**  The governor is also Republican.

With such a state Republican makeup, it should be no surprise that Michigan has become a Right To Work State.  Not long ago, the state legislature was dominated by Democrats.  The switch came in 2010, when, I guess, workers became disillusoned with the lack of economic progress under the Democrats and redistricting may have played a part also.

A detailed strategy of the Republican move to make Michigan a Right to Work State, is given at: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100309219

*  http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Michigan_State_Senate
** http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Michigan_House_of_Representatives

INHERITANCE TAXES

An informative article on what might be in store for estate/inheritance/gift taxes is given at: https://www.cnbc.com/id/100296248


For the rest of this year, the estate/inheritance tax applies only to estates valued over $5 million and the tax rate on these is 35%; however, if we go over the fiscal cliff, the inheratance tax will apply to estates worth more than to $1 million and be taxed at 55%.

Republicans have been saying that the the tax, they call the "death tax," hurts farmers and small business men.  Some Republicans would prefer to have no estate tax, as it was in 2010, but others will agree to leaving the estate tax what if is in 2012.  In contrast President Obama proposes a exclusion of the first $3.5 million with a tax rate of 35% on those estate exceeding the exclusion sum.  The estate tax raised $10.6 billion in 2012, according to the Tax Policy Center.   At the 2012 rates, they estimate that the estate tax would raise a total of $161 billion by 2021, a 10 year interval.  If the estate tax reverts to the old level, the estimate is a raise of $531 billion.  Obama's plan is estimated to raise a total of $258 billion by 2021.

As to the estate tax hurting farmers, the Tax Policy Center says that fewer than 50 out of the 3,270 paying estate taxes were small farmers and small buinesses, and they paid less than 1% of the total taxes.  "The top one percent of earners, by contrast, paid nearly 80 percent of the estate tax last year. The top 0.1 percent paid nearly half."

The goal is to reduce the Federal budget by $4 trillion by 2021 so letting the estate tax revert to $1 million would raise more than 10% of the total by itself.  We are fooling ourselves if we think that lowering the Federal budget by $4 trillion can be done without pain on inheritance.  So reluctantly, I would prefer to let the estate tax revert to the old level.  It would not affect the poor and probably most of the middle class.

Note:  After writing the above, I found a group of super wealthy people, including Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, who propose a $4 million exemption with a graduated tax rate starting at 45% for fortunes greater than the exemption:
 https://www.cnbc.com/id/100301732

GRANDMA

Grandmothers seem to be the epidomy or epidome of old age.  You may remember the advertisement this last couple of years of grandma in a wheel chair being dumped over a cliff.  Or you might have heard, grandma is being thrown under the bus.  But consider that the average age of women having their child was 25 in 2006.*  So lets say that a woman has her first child at 25  and that child has a first child also at 25.  The first mother then becomes a grandmother at 50.  While 50 might seem old to a, say, 17 year old, grandma is 12 years from being able to receive early Social Security and 15 years from qualifying for Medicare and probably is still working for pay.  The grandchild will be in high school by the time grandma qualifies for Medicare.  Let's say that, that child also has a first child at 25, then grandma becomes a great grandmother at the age of 75, old perhaps, but still short of the life expectancy at birth for women in the U.S. of 80.8 yrs.

Recall, however, that 25 is the average age for a woman at first birth of a child.  Even if we run the same sequence at an age of first birth by a woman of 30, she can easily become a grandmother at age 60, still two years shy of early Social Security and five years from qualifying for Medicare.  If we run the sequence for age 20, the woman becomes a grandmother at age 40, 22 years from early social Security and 25 years from Medicare coverage.  She would become a great grandmother at age 60 and a great great grandmother at age 80, still within the life expectancy of an American woman at birth.

Whereas grandmother does sound old, in life grandmotherhood normally isn't all that old. She probably is still working and doesn't qualify for even early Social Security or Medicare.  Whereas we probably should shift to great grandma for typifying old age, I doubt it will happen.



* http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db21.pdf

JIM DE MINT

It is hard not to cheer Jim DeMint , Senator from South Carolina, leaving the Senate for the Heritage Foundation.  He will finally get his chance to do what many Republicans talk about when "serving" in politics, to leave it and make some "real money."  My caution is that we don't know who will replace him.  Unfortunately, there is no bottom of the barrel and things can get worse.  After all DeMint had some redeeming graces, i.e. he approved of abortion to save the life of the mother, though he disapproved of it in cases of rape and incest.  Of course, he opposes health care for the masses.  He also doesn't want gays and single mothers to teach in our schools.  He has been a negative critic of what others propose and was not a legislator, and he opposed our president at every turn.

Can he develop being head of the Heritage Foundation into a political powerhouse?  Are the days of the heritage foundation being a conservative think tank over?  Time will tell.  After all, the most powerful Republicans seem to be outside of political offices.  Consider Grover Norquist and Rush Limbaugh.  Although he  backed some conservative winners for the Senate, he also backed kooky losers, the likes of Todd Akin, Sharron Angle, Ken Buck, Richard Murdock, and Christine O'Donnell.  There are those who feel DeMint lost the Senate for the Republicans through these backings.  Well, at least he didn't back Linda McMahon who personally lost the Republican Party TWO Senate seats!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_DeMint
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/12/jim-demints-greatest-hits-and-misses.php
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2012/12/06/good-riddance-mr-demint/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_McMahon

SMALL BUSINESS CONTROVERSY

One frequently hears certain politicians talk about how restoring the temporary tax cuts,on even the wealthest 2% of tax payers earning over $250,000 would hurt small businesses, the main job creators.  It is well known now that about 97% of small businesses earn less than $250,000/yr.  A rather detailed consideration of this number is given by the Center On Budget and Policy Priorities* that yields an even somewhat small percentage, perhaps 1.9%.

The Federal government definition of a small business is complex, but is usually given as 500 employees.   For investment purposes, a monetary limit is usally adopted, say $2 billion.  An interesting discussion of the problem is given by Ruth Marcus in the NY Times.**  Some parts of this article are given in italics follow:

....the economic drag of higher rates on the wealthiest taxpayers is far less than the impact on the middle class. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that raising top tax brackets would lower growth next year by one-tenth of a percentage point, compared to a 1.3-percentage-point hit if middle-class taxes rose.

....according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities,* 237 of the wealthiest 400 taxpayers, with incomes averaging more than $200 million, would be considered small-business owners. So would President Obama, because he receives book royalties.
...............................................................................

Rather, it sweeps in all taxpayers with business income, no matter how small a share of earnings, along with lawyers or hedge fund managers whose firms are organized as partnerships.


These upper-bracket “small businesses” are not making hiring decisions based on tax rates. Most don’t employ anyone. According to the Treasury Department, less than 6 percent of income to taxpayers in the top two brackets went to small businesses that employ people.

Warren Buffet recently said that the top 100 earners in the U.S. would be unaffected by the increase in marginal tax rates.  This is so because of income tax deductions or loopholes.  Nonetheless, raising the top two brackets from 33% and 35% to 36% and 39.6%  is estimated to yield $493 billion over 10 years.***  This sum would constiture about 12% of the $4 trillion austerity budget needed to return Federal deficit to 2011 values.

If you haven't read the Buffet op-ed article, you should: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/opinion/buffett-a-minimum-tax-for-the-wealthy.html.

* http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2697
** http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ruth-marcus-the-shifting-line-on-tax-cuts/2012/12/04/e50bd63e-3e46-11e2-ae43-cf491b837f7b_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions
***http://crfb.org/sites/default/files/Raising_Revenue_from_Higher_Earners_11_15-2_1.pdf

NON-DEMOCRATIC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Democratic members of the House of Representatives received more votes than Republican members in 2012 (53,952,240 to 53,402,643); yet the Republicans have many more Representatives (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/08/house-candidates-votes_n_2096978.html).  How can this be?  Representatives are elected in districts and not state wide or nationally.  The party in power in the states can realign districts to minimize the opposing parties members and maximize their own.  This is called "gerrymandering."  It is usually done at the time of a census, but has been done at other times, also.  Doing this, the Republicans won 234 seats to the Democrats 201 in 2012.  Ah politics.  How we manage to avoid Democracy in this country.

The same thing, of course, happens in the election for President because of the Electoral College method of choosing the President.  In 2000, Al Gore received the popular vote but lost the Electoral vote which is what matters.  Of course the Democrats called foul but the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Republican George W. Bush.  The Republicans thought that might happen in this last election (because of faulty polling),* but Obama won both the electoral college vote and the numerical vote.

* Strangely, there were Republicans who thought that they would win the election for Presidency in 2012 (again because of faulty polling) and were all set for a celebration.

POTPOURRI: MEDICAL EXPENSES, BENGHAZI, & INSULTING ISLAM

I wonder how many people who want to control medical costs have supported compulsory ultrasound before abortion.  I'm not sure just how many states have compulsory ultrasounds before abortion, but I have seen 8 referred to and 22 have some sort of ultrasound regulation with 11 more states having them on the docket (http://bangordailynews.com/2012/02/27/news/nation/more-states-moving-to-require-ultrasound-before-abortion/).  Usually the woman has to take two trips to the physician, one for the ultrasound and another for the abortion itself.  All this raises the costs of care, of course.

Now it seems to be coming clear that the opposition to Susan Rice becoming Secretary of State by John McCain is that she had some harsh things to say about him in the 2008 presidential battle.  Lindsay Graham's opposition seems to be related to the Democrats opposition to John R. Bolton's nomination as Ambassador to the United Nations by George W. Bush in 1980 (but he was appointed as a recess appointment).  So it seems the opposition to Susan Rice really has little to do with her statements that the Benghazi, Libya, disaster  in which a U.S. Ambassador was killed was a spontaneous demonstration that escalated.  The usual question being asked is why wasn't more protection provided to the Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.  Of course protection to Embassys is supposed to be provided by the home country, which proved inadequate in this case.  But since so much effort is placed on Benghazi (Libya's second largest city), there are a couple of questions that seem relevant.  Why wasn't the Consulate closed?  After all there had been a previous attack on the Consulate with a hole blown through the protection wall, and the Brits had closed their operation there because of all the unrest in the area.  The second question of interest is why did our ambassador go there in the first place?  Don't know that we will ever hear the answer to these questions.

We seem to think it is important that the Benghazi incident had nothing to do with the insulting movie trailer that was critical of Muhammad.  The attack on the consulate may have been planned as a 9/11 al Qaeda commemorative event, but the movie trailer probably added something to it as demonstrations were done throughout the Muslim world (Egypt,Iran, Israel, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, Yemen, and Palestinian) particularly after the Friday prayers.  If we think, however, that when we do or say things that are insulting to the Islamic religion, it does not incite a hot head group to physical violence, then there is no hope of our reconciliation with Muslims.  In addition it also increases the anti-American attitude among a large group of Muslims who are more peaceful.  Now it is known that an Egyptian court has put a death sentence, in absentia, on seven Egyptians thought to be involved with the movie trailer should they return to Egypt (http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/28/world/meast/egypt-anti-islam-film/index.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_world+(RSS%3A+World)).  Of course there have been many other incidents in the past such as our burning of Qur'ans in Afghanistan in which four of our soldiers were killed.

SHOES: LOST & FOUND (Biographical)

When I was a small boy, I used to take off my shoes in the house and leave them laying about here and there.  Because I never remembered where I took off the shoes, I had difficulty finding them. I even had nightmares about being late for school because I couldn't find my shoes.  Leaving the shoes around irritated my father so, to teach me a lesson, he would throw the shoes down the basement steps to be with the spiders and mice.   Little did he know that he was doing me a favor because I knew the first place to look for the shoes and I wasn't worried abut the spiders and never saw a mouse.

HOSTESS BRANDS COVERUP

What I want to know is what did Mitt Romney know about the Hostess Brands rape by Vulture Capitalists (Ahh, private equity) and when did he know it?  Did he keep it suppressed until after the election to prevent a rout in the presidential election because he was a prior private equity executive?  Are their workers part of the hated 47% who pay no income taxes?  Where is Senator McCain when we need him?

It was because of Wonder bread that induced the saying, "The greatest thing since sliced bread." was introduced and was loved for sandwiches because it had no holes and didn't dry out quickly.  Hostess cupcakes were heavily advertised in my youth.  And then there are the beloved Twinkies, more than anything.

Take away my Social Security, but don't touch my wonder Bread, Hostess cupcakes, and Twinkies.  Wait, I don't get Social Security.  All the better.  Take it away.  That will teach the hated 47%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostess_Brands
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonder_Bread
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostess_CupCake

MITT ROMNEY

My heart goes out to Mitt Romney.  The effort he put in , in his failed run for the presidency, was incredible.  He went through a brutal primary campaign in which he felt compelled to flip flop on socially radical stands (e.g. on abortion, global warming, and other issues), then he had to shift gears and flip flop again in which to woo "ordinary" voters in the Presidential election.  I think what he was saying was, "Just elect me as President and I'll fix it."

Romney was a good student in law school and outstanding in simultaneously pursuing an MBA, saved the Winter Olympics (and gave his salary to charity),  and got passed an incredible health plan as Governor of Massachusetts (Where he refused the salary.).  He gave away his inheritance to BYU for the George W. Romney School of Business Management.  He did an outstanding job in his missionary work to France.  He tithed to the Mormon Church in which he also became an official, and was very successful at making money in business.  Early in his tenure at Bain Capital he started out in venture capital (i.e., creating startups) and was very successful at that, even creating quite a few jobs, but switched to private equity where making money was easier.  The guy had seemingly never failed at anything in his life until he was defeated at the age of 47 by popular Senator Ted Kennedy in a Senate bid, but he was undeterred in pursuing a political career.  It is worth noting that, though very wealthy, he gave up his pursuit of money to enter politics.  In doing so he never came close to such financial leaders as Bill Gates and the Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffet.  In fact he has never even entered the top 100 fortunes, so far.

It became clear, however, that Romney's background made him out of touch with the populace and led to such gaffs as his talk to supporters about he wouldn't get the votes of the "dependent" 47% who don't pay income taxes,* insulting many workers who vote Republican.  After he was defeated for President, he has given another talk to supporters claiming that he lost because of extreme gifts given by Democrats to the less well off.*  He obviously is not introspective.  He not only promised to return $713 billion to Medicare that he wrongly claimed was taken from benefits, but he overlooked all the income tax gifts given to the wealthy by the government (e.g. 15% income tax rate on qualified dividends, 15% on long-term capital gains, low taxes on "carried interest," no income taxes on Municipal bonds, among other more complex gifts) that permit him to pay less than a 15% income tax rate in many years rather than the 35% he would have paid without loop holes.  He even promised to extend tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans.

Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney; http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2011/07/republican-presidential-candidates-for.html; and http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2011/12/tthe-republican-primaries.html

* http://www.marketplace.org/topics/elections/campaign-trail/numbers-behind-mitt-romneys-47-comment; http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-mitt-romney-obama-gifts-20121115,0,2129448.story

I ALREADY MISS THE GOOD OLD DAYS

I already miss those good old days, not that long ago actually, when all we had to worry about was important things, people like Paula Broadwell, Jill Kelley, a couple of middle aged 4-star generals and a topless FBI agent (http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/11/laffaire-petraeus-today.html).  Don't you?

Now it is ugly as an "over-the-hill" Senator, who once was a rational force in the Senate but now is after one last hurrah, pursues something known as Benghazi that everyone has lost interest in except for him and a few of his colleagues.  You know, that violent demonstration/terrorist attack in which an ambassador was killed along with three of his "troops" in some backwater consulate in Lybia where violent acts in the vicinity are almost an every day occurrence (http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/09/you-can-rationalize-anything.html).  Senator Feinstein has commented, "My biggest concern is, there are literally hundreds of threat warnings in the material that has been accumulated," Feinstein said. "There were five attacks during the year, one prior attack on the consulate itself. The question I have is ... why wasn't something done about it?"  But this doesn't seem to be the serious question which our dear "over-the-hill" Senator says is why did our ambassador to the U./N. - Susan Rice - say, five days after the event, that the violence was a demonstration that got out of hand?

Personally, I never thought this issue could last until the late-elections, but some - including the news media - want to keep it going and are demanding a "Whitewater" type investigation.  And apparently Susan Rice was only parroting the declassified information on the topic.  This misinformation, if it matters, was seemingly done because the FBI or someone thought they were hot on the trail of the organizing perpetrators and didn't want them to know.  Instead what they did was what is known as "hanging Susan Rice out to dry."

So far as I am concerned, if the American Benghazi Consulate attack was the best Al Qaeda could do to "celebrate" 9/11, they are weak indeed, hardly even a shadow of the real 9/11.  It was even far away from the embassy in Tripoli.  Somehow, forgotten in all this is that an estimated 30,000 Libyans demonstrated against the attack and the militias involved in the attack (http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/11/laffaire-petraeus-today.html).

The fuss being made over Benghazi is interesting when one considers that the diefied Ronald Reagan had BOTH a couple of embassy attacks, including the big one in Beirut, Lebanon, where 17 Americans died (among 63 total) on April 18, 1983 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_embassy_bombing) plus another in Kuwait where five people were killed on December 12, 1983 (which by-the-way Reagan refused to call an act of terror) (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/19/1147106/-Breaking-Ronald-Reagan-refuses-to-call-embassy-attack-an-act-of-terror) AND the marine barracks attack where 241 of our troops died on October 23, 1983.  For good measure there was the Korean airliner 007 shot down by the Soviets September 1, 1983 where 269 passengers were killed including a U.S. congressman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007).  Somehow Reagan's admirers forgave him for all of this.  Furthermore, Democrats did not make political hay out of any of this.  But today, everything seems to be on the table for political gain.

L'AFFAIRE PETRAEUS -- TODAY

The central character of this Greek Tragedy (or is it a comedy?), a voyeur's dream, is the 60 yr old, highly  regarded ret. 4 star General Petraeus, now-resigned director of the CIA.  He is arguably the most highly regarded General since Eisenhower, though consideration should also be given to ret. General Powell.  Then there is Gen. Petraeus's pretty  40 yr old married late(?)-mistress Paula Broadwell, mother of two, who did a  dissertation on Gen. Petraeus and became his biographer.  He met her in 2006 and began running with her in 2008.  Let's see, another principal character is the married, foreign-born, 37-yr-old Lebanese-American beauty Jill Kelley, mother of three, who hosts parties for the military in the Tampa.  Until today, the final character is an FBI agent who sent bare chested pictures of himself to Jill Kelley and will be referred to as just "topless."  An addition to this play on November 12th, is 59-yr-old 4 star Gen. John Allen who succeeded Gen Petraeus as commander in Afghanistan.  This morning, it was announced that an investigation of around 30,000 (!) pages of e-mails between Gen Allen and Mrs. Kelley over a two year period (more than 40 pages a DAY!).

OK, let's see what we seem to know now (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/petraeus-broadwell-diary-affair-article-1.1200840).  June 30, 2010 - The Senate confirms Petraeus as the new commander for war in Afghanistan. Over the next year, Broadwell expands her research of Petraeus into an authorized biography. She makes multiple trips to Afghanistan and is given unprecedented access to Petraeus and his commanders. 
...............................................................................

The article goes on to say that "Officially" the affair between Broadwell and Petraeus begins during November , 2011 (according to ret. Col. Steve Boylan), a couple months after he was appointed director of the CIA (another account says it was August).  Ah huh.  The affair is said to have been terminated about four months ago.

In May of 2012, Jill Kelley says she started receiving "threatening" e-mails and appeals to Topless to investigate, which he did.  (I wonder what he expected to get for doing all this for her?)  This morning On Morning Joe, it appears two of the "threatening" e-mails say something like "Does your husband know what you are doing" and "I saw you making inappropriate touching of (Petraeus) under the table."  So we have a little jealousy here but hardly threatening.  It appears that when Kelley found out how invasive of her privacy the investigation would be, she tried to stop it, but once this ball started rolling down hill, it couldn't be stopped.  Incidentally, Mrs. Kelley has license plates on her car that say "Honorary Council," which she feels should give her special privileges.  Me thinks there is a bit of a big head here.

Now there are pictures of boxes of materials being taken from Broadwell's home.  It seems that (presumably declassified) Top Secret materials are in Broadwell's possession so this drama has not yet played out.

Please remember that we are not dealing with impressionable young girls smitten by fancy uniforms of 20 something yr-old soldiers, but two mature married women and mothers in their mid to late 30s involved with two married Generals, perhaps suffering from male menopause, old enough to be their fathers.

I would like to add as a general comment that I believe that military life is very hard on marriages with one spouse (usually but not always men) being away from home for very long periods of time.  I suspect that affairs are actually very common though they are against the Code Of Military Justice.  In the 1970s, there was a study that concluded that 80% of  husbands have had an affair.  I recall at work five of us tired-looking researchers at a lunch table, and I said "Four of us at this table have had an affair, and I know it is not me."  Hard to believe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Petraeus
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/scandal-disrupts-petraeus-mistress-birthday-getaway-article-1.1200956
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57548827/who-is-jill-kelley/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Allen



November 14-15, 2012:   Paula Broadwell has considerable classified information on her computer that is inadequately protected.  She is a reserve officer in intelligence.  Her security classification has been revoked. (https://www.cnbc.com/id/49833869) Jill Kelley's pass to the military base near Tampa has been revoked (http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nightly-news/49830265/#49830265)  Topless's name is Frederick W. Humphries II (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/15/petraeus-affair-instigator-fbi-named)

INCREASING INCOME TAXES ON THE WEALTHY

In light of the election, we are hearing some different thoughts from some conservatives.  Perhaps the most interesting is from Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard (https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/13af5f57502c4dbf):

“I don’t really understand why Republicans don’t take Obama’s offer to freeze taxes for everyone below $250,000,” he said. “Make it a million? Really? The Republican Party is going to fall on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic and half of whom live in Hollywood and are hostile.”

And he is quite correct.  Seven of the top 10 richest members of congress are Democrats and Nancy Pelosi is #12.  So they are doing it to themselves  I like to say that these are the wealthy with a conscience.  The truth is, however, that most wealthy people take advantage of tax loopholes (Mitt Romney being just one example) so raising the top income tax level will not hurt them.

Besides, there is the implication put out that if the income tax level is raised to 39.6% it will be on their entire income, whereas it actually is just on the sum ABOVE $250,000.  Thus if you made $300,000, the 39.6% will be just on the $50,000 above $250,000 for an increase of just $2,480 over the 35% rate.

SOME THOUGHTS ON THE RECENT ELECTIONS

First of all, I am thankful that we had two such fine families running for president.

Then I regret that the American electorate demands such negative campaigning.  Unfortunately if one side does it, the other must also.  The electorate says they don't like it, but they do pay attention to it.  In this regard, the Democrats seemed to be more effective in their negative campaigning than the Republicans.

After all the money spent by outside groups such as Super PACS in the campaign, we ended up having the same Democratic president, an increase in Democratic Senators by two (but not enough to break filibusters) and  an increase of Democratic Representatives by seven (but not enough to take over the House).  The electorate seems to say to our politicians "Make it work!"

Mitch McConnell's first priority of defeating the President didn't work.  Will we face another four years of total obstruction?

Somehow Republicans are going to have to learn how to love Hispanics and quit kicking them in the teeth.  It is going to be very hard for them, but Hispanics tend to be conservative and can be a natural component of a conservative movement.

There are no precedents in our politics anymore.  It used to be that politics was said to stop at the borders, but no longer. The immediate politicalization of the Benghazi attack on September 11 shows that.  I really thought that Benghazi couldn't be made to last until the election proved to be unfounded as the media was more than willing to keep this issue going.  Ronald Reagan suffered both the Lebanese Embassy bombing* in 1983 in which  63 people died was never politicized by the Democrats nor was the Beirut (Lebanon) base bombing in which 299 American and French forces were killed.*  These two disasters have not stopped Ronald Reagan from becoming deified by many Republicans, no doubt by some of those who want to keep the Benghazi issue alive even after the election.

Romney's demonizaton of the 47% who pay no Federal income tax as being lazy dependents may be unfortunate but is a widely held view of many Republicans.  I know this both from Republicans I know and from boards on Motley Fool.  But it also does insult many of the white working class people who vote Republican.  Please remember that 47% of the Households earn less than $47,000/yr which undoubtedly includes many of white workers.  One cause of this lack of Federal income tax payments is the child tax credit where there is a $1000 per child deduction from their taxes, and this deduction was raised under the Bush-43 administration from $500/child to $1,000/child.**

The Romney claim that he knows how to generate jobs is both right and wrong.  Private equity, at least in the short term, eliminates jobs and does not create them.  That is the first thing they do, fire people.  Labor is the elastic component of our system.  However in the beginning of Bain Capital, they emphasized Start Ups which do create new jobs.  Romney switched to private equity because it was a quicker way to make money and that is what Bain Capital is all about.  There is nothing wrong with that.  Whether in the long term private equity creates jobs, I don't know , but suspect that it doesn't.

But weren't start ups what Obama was doing in promoting alternative energy?  In spite of the Solyndra failure, the amount of losses in the Federal government Start Ups program is small.  Even Solyndra, however, served a good purpose because the Solyndra system didn't use the special glass used to solar energy.  Their approach caused the price of the special glass to plummet to make Solyndra uneconomic.  I have not seen any article examining whether the price of glass plummeting has saved more money in solar energy panels than the losses on Solyndra, but over time it might.  Personally I wish the government would have taken Solyndra to production before closing it down.  If you are going to be involved in start ups, there are going to be failures and the emphasis needs to be on the net.

There is a point in saying that the Federal government shouldn't be choosing winners and losers of course; however, the government does this sort of thing all the time.  Think how important the government emphasis by NASA and the DoD on miniaturization of electronics has been not only to producing inexpensive desk top computers but now the tablets and smart phones.  Consider the World Wide Web (WWW) and Geographic Positions Systems (GPS) for just two.  These were developed for military purposes.  The important thing was really permitting these two innovations to be released into the public sector where private industry could promote them for Civilian uses.

*  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_States_embassy_bombing; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombing

** http://www.irs.gov/uac/Ten-Facts-about-the-Child-Tax-Credit

COMEBACK KID COMES BACK -- AGAIN!

Well!  So Obama came back to be reelected after all.  He has fooled me several times (an example is getting Obamacare), and here I had suggested he might be the best one-term president ever (http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2010/08/best-one-term-president-ever.html).  I did, however, protect myself a bit in writing " Therefore I feel that President Obama probably will be a one-term president no matter his other outstanding accomplishments; however, we have learned that it is dangerous to count out The Comeback Kid."  And so he did.  There is concern that Obama has not outlined a visionary agenda for his second term, but there is much to his first term that still need to be consummated.  A good example is that the Dodd-Frank bill is still being assimilated with maybe two-thirds of the regulations still to be decided.   Obamacare is not yet fully implemented.  And then there is the Dream Act still to be consummated  as well as the infrastructure legislation among others.  Also the "fiscal cliff" seems to need to be dealt with.

Will Republicans be more flexible in doing the nations' business?  Mitch McConnell's stated primary goal of defeating President Obama's reelection didn't work out so well.  Will Republican's somehow grow to love Hispanic Americans?  Oh sure, they do have a few Republican Hispanic governors,  Senators and Representative, but, after all, Obama did get 71% of the Hispanic vote.  Are Republican's happy that they kept Elizabeth Warren from being head of the Consumer Protection Agency only to have her take away a Senate seat from them?

So it has happened again.   As I type this, the stock exchanges are down big time although in 80% of the Democratic Presidencies, the S&P500 has been up and the DJIA almost as much.

It will interesting to follow.  But it sure appears that Obamamcare is protected.

GASOLINE PRICES CONTINUE TO FALL: NOVEMBER 2012

Gasoline prices continue to fall as predicted just a couple days ago (Gasoline Prices Are Falling: November 3, 2012)http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2012/11/gasoline-prices-are-falling-november.html).

From Gas Prices Tumble at Quickest Rate  in 4 Years: Survey (https://www.cnbc.com/id/49692132):

 "Gasoline prices averaged $3.5454 per gallon on November 2, down 20.75 cents from October 19 when drivers were paying $3.7529 at the pump, Lundberg said."
..........................................................

"Another reason for the total U.S. price decline in the latest survey is California, the biggest state consumer, where pump prices fell 49 cents in past two weeks after an extreme price increase a month ago because of refinery problems.

The November 2 survey shows that gas prices have fallen a total of 29.21 cents in the last month, Lundberg said.

The highest prices for regular gasoline recorded in the November 2 survey were in San Francisco at $4.05 a gallon, while drivers in Memphis, Tennessee were paying the least at $3.11 per gallon."

The station closest to our home in Seven Lakes, NC, is advertising $3.51/gal, a bit lower than the national average and $0.39/gal from its peak this year.

HOV 3 QUESTION?

Many people today believe that life starts at conception and that a fertilized woman's egg is a "personhood."  The mayor has declared that people driving into Manhattan have to obey a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) 3 rule, i.e. three people in the vehicle.  SO if a woman declares she is carrying a personhood, does that account for two of the three?  What if she says it is twins?

GASOLINE PRICES ARE FALLING: NOVEMBER 2012

In spite of hurricane Sandy, gasoline price in the U.S. are falling (http://www.cnbc.com/id/49659811):
"AAA expects that gas prices across the country will continue to drop through the end of the year, assuming a smooth restart to production following Hurricane Sandy. AAA predicts the national average price of gas could fall to $3.40 a gallon by Election Day and between $3.25 and $3.40 a gallon by Thanksgiving. Gas prices could drop by 40 cents a gallon between now and the end of the year, says AAA spokesperson Avery Ash."

The national average is said to be $3.496/gal.  California is something else again and the lowest prices quoted by gasbuddy.com for Los Angeles is $3.96/gal and for San Francisco is $3.76/gal, but $3.65/gal in San Diego.  Perhaps it is no wonder that the Toyota Prius is the most popular car in California.

Where we are near Pinehurst, NC, the golf capital, the lowest gasoline price for regular I have seen as of yesterday is $3.58/gal whereas near our home it is $3.65/gal, but the latter is still 25 cents/gal lower than the peak this year.  The big cities in the state have even lower prices, however, with gasbuddy,com quoting prices as low as $3.18/gal in Raleigh and $3.17/gal in Charlotte.

FIRST DAY AT SCHOOL: NO CRY, THEN CRY

When I was very small, my mother coached me on going to my first day at kindergarten.  she would let me off and pick me up so I wasn't lost but in good care in the meantime.  So when she let me off for school, I just marched in with no crying or hysterics.  After school, my mother did pick me up and took me to a candy store to get a piece of candy for being such a good boy.  While I was trying to decide what piece of candy I wanted, the store keeper asked my mother what the event was that was being honored.  She said for being a good boy at my first day of school to which the store keeper replied, "Before you know it he will be in college."  I cried and cried because I knew I couldn't do college work.

But wait, there is a sequel to this funny story.  As it turned out, I was to spend 11 years in college accumulating  Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Geological Engineering degrees, a Master of Science, and, from the Marines of educational institutions, a Ph.D.

If truth be known, I am of rather average intellect so how did all this happen?  For one thing you have to want it or be highly motivated or as one professor commented, "You've got a bit of a bull dog in you."

I recognized that in the Earth sciences, there was a lot of terminology (Medicine would be another field requiring lots of memorization.).  I've been told you cannot improve your memory, but that is not true.  After school while I waited for my mother's piano teaching to be over, I would practice memorizing poems, any poem of my choice.  I got so at one time I could recite the entire Gunga Din by Rudyard Kipling and The Ballad Of The Northern Lights by Robert Service.  I could look down a list of 20 items twice and remember it for 48 hrs, which proved invaluable for tests.

The last of the principal things was to learn not to panic.  If I couldn't answer the first question, I should go on until I found one that I could answer, then look for another and work my way to the hardest question.  Sometimes by that point my mind had cleared, and I could even answer the hard question.  Later in my brief teaching career, I found I could control the average grade on a test to a large extent as to whether I put the hardest question first or last on the examination  In fact I got so I would work myself up before an examination.  I'd jump up and down and repeat strings of things I knew on the examination topic (Repeat the 30 uranium minerals was one I recall or how to derive the radioactive decay equation was another.).  Get the blood circulating and the mind sharpened.  I call it intellectual athletics.

AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM

For some time, I have been made uncomfortable about the frequent appeal to American Exceptionalism.*  Why do we need to keep mentioning ourselves of this?  It seems to me that if you really believe this, you don't have to keep talking about it.  Now it turns out that I am not the only one who is bothered by this: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/21/sunday-review/candidates-and-the-truth-about-america.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121021.  Please read this article as I will not address the health issues contained therein.

Yes, of course, we are the only nation to send men to the moon and the only nation not only to bring them back alive but  with loads of lunar samples to boot.  To do this we had to develop miniaturized computers for lunar exploration (Apollo Program) and Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (IBM).  We developed the World Wide Web (WWW) and the Geographic Positioning system (GPS), originally for military purposes.  These were all Federal government initiatives.  Once given these tools, private industry has been able to develop them further into civilian use.  It was a great ride.  The main role of private industry is to take an invention and incrementally improve it.  Thus we have smart phones like Blackberries and iPhones I, II, III, IV, and now V among others.  After some false starts, we now have iPad I, II, and III plus many other tablet computers by other companies.  Slowly people are beginning to pay bills with their smart phones.  And a multitude of companies offer goods for sale on the internet.  These are all wonderful gadgets, but they are not the grand projects of yesteryear.

It was said after WW-II that jet aircraft would find military purposes, but would always be too expensive for commercial use. Now the airline  industry is dominated by jet aircraft.  On a trip to Hawaii several years ago, a rancher told us that he economically shipped his cattle back to the mainland on Boeing 747s.  He could even physically load more cattle on the airplane, but he couldn't because it would overheat the plane.  Wonderful.  Incidentally, the Boeing 747 was originally developed for military purposes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747).

But somewhere along the line, we seemed to lose it.  When?  I think it was when we passed up development of the supersonic commercial airplane in the early 1970s.  We have competitors now.  Our automobile industry let the Germans and the Japanese into the market with more reliable automobiles.  I heard the other day that the best selling automobile in California is the Toyota Prius, a hybrid of gasoline and electric motors.  We couldn't develop a commercial hybrid car in this country because gasoline was too cheap.  There was no incentive for American's to buy high milage gasoline cars because the annual cost of gasoline was at noise level so they had to be developed elsewhere where the price of gasoline is high.  Cheap gasoline is slowly disappearing because it sells on global markets that control the price to a large extent.  Yes, the Federal government is trying to get the electric car developed so maybe we will catch up on the next generation of automobiles.  It is a fine goal with lots of Americans saying it is not worth the effort and cheering every failure.  We probably can look forward to growth of the natural gas automobile, something I rode in when in Japan in 1965, but you do lose trunk space.

In solar energy, we have many competitors, but it is gradually getting cheaper.  Our government did try to develop solar panels that did not use expensive glass (Solyndra; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra), but the glass panel industry lowered the price of glass to make the cylindrical solid state panels uneconomic and the company declared bankruptcy.  We might have cheered forcing down the price of solar panel glass, but all the emphasis was on the failure of the company.  I would be surprised if something like the Solyndra method is developed by some other country in the future.

What I find strangest of all is the growing claims that college is not worth it or what I call the Dumbing Down of America: (http://stopcontinentaldrift.blogspot.com/2010/10/dumbing-down-of-america-if-you-listen.html)

We have lost the spirit of exceptionalism in this country.  We can get it back if we stop having such negative leadership and return to having more optimistic leadership.  Stop emphasizing why we shouldn't do things and return to a can do spirit.  Quit insisting that government can't develop things  when history has shown that they can.

* A word not in my spell checker, by the way, but see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism

PRESIDENTS AND THE PRICE OF GASOLINE

The following is excerpted from CNBC (October 18, 2012):  https://www.cnbc.com/id/49461923.  You are encouraged to read the whole article.

Recent history seems to have borne out that view. Despite the recent Bush administration's strong support for the oil and gas industry, pump prices rose from a low of about $1.20 a gallon in late 2001 to a peak of $4 a gallon before crashing below $2 shortly before he left office in 2009. Shortly after Obama took office, prices began a steady climb and kept rising but remain just shy of that 2009 peak.
................................
U.S. energy policy has encouraged the exploration and production of crude oil, the biggest single variable in the pump price of gasoline, through tax subsidies that promote drilling. Those tax breaks, which were expanded during the Bush administration, have helped spur a boom in domestic production that has reversed a 20-year decline in U.S. 

U.S. demand for gasoline peaked in 2007 and has been declining steadily since then. Part of the reason, as Obama mentioned in Tuesday’s debate, is that the recession cut into demand for energy. But gasoline consumption is also falling because the cars and trucks are becoming more fuel-efficient. Obama cited his administration’s efforts to drive fuel efficiency standards higher.

As domestic demand has fallen, U.S. refiners have continued to squeeze more out of each barrel of oil. If the U.S. market were a closed system, the surplus gasoline would tend to drive down prices. But the system isn’t closed. With domestic demand falling and capacity inching higher, refiners have been exporting gasoline to overseas markets. Last year, the U.S. became a net exporter of gasoline and other refined products for the first time since 1949. (BOLDING MINE FOR EMPHASIS)

Meanwhile, the price of gasoline is FALLING!  Excerpted from CNBC (October 17, 2012).:  https://www.cnbc.com/id/49449346  Again I encourage you to read the whole article.

A dramatic spiral for gasoline prices in some key battleground states comes just three weeks before the U.S. presidential elections.

Ohio voters have watched prices at the gas pump drop by nearly 20 cents on average in the past week. At the same time, retail gas prices have plunged more than 10 cents in Wisconsin and Illinois.

.....................................

"I suspect that both candidates can guarantee $3 to $3.25 gal gasoline in Ohio after this week's gasoline debacle," said OPIS analyst Tom Kloza. "You will see some sharp retail drops in battleground states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Wisconsin, and Nevada in the next few weeks."

.......................................

But while the notion that the government could somehow control gasoline prices is appealing, the reality is that the price you pay is set daily, sometimes hourly, by market forces around the world.

A series of U.S. refinery glitches and tight supplies in some regions caused gasoline prices to surge earlier this month to the highest prices since the spring. But the switch to a less expensive winter grade of gasoline, weak refinery demand and increase of supplies in certain areas caused gasoline prices to start coming down. An unexpected increase in U.S. gasoline supplies in the past week could cause pump prices to fall even further.

WOMEN AND MAMMOGRAMS

Dr. Jill Vecchio, a Colorado Radiologist who is head of the Breast cancer section at Lutheran Hospital claims that women now can have mammograms only every other year starting at age 50 and going to age 74.  If the exams are given every year the physician is subject to a fine and can even be put in jail.*  I don't have a dog in this fight, but I did find the following:  

Medicare

As a part of the Affordable Care Act, Medicare covers the full cost of a mammogram once every 12 months for all women with Medicare aged 40 and over. (Women are eligible for Medicare if they are age 65 and older, are disabled, or have end-stage renal disease.) Medicare also pays for a clinical breast exam when it is done for screening or prevention.  See the whole article at:  http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/BreastCancer/MoreInformation/BreastCancerEarlyDetection/breast-cancer-early-detection-paying-for-br-ca-screening

Thus, I cannot confirm the hysterical claim by the good breast cancer specialist who says mammograms are allowed only every other year beginning at age 50 and that it is illegal to perform mammograms every year and that she could be fined and put in jail.  As nearly as I can tell, the  breast cancer specialist has a political ax to grind and is either ill informed or lying.  She gives no reference for her claim.

However I also found the following concerning the age 50 and every other year:

 The reason is that, based on the findings, giving mammograms to women every other year from ages 50 to 69 reduces breast cancer deaths by 16.5 percent over a lifetime. If screening is started at age 40 and continued every other year, there's a 19.5 percent lifetime reduction in deaths from breast cancer. That 3 percent difference translates roughly to saving one woman's life for every 1,000 who are screened but also causing hundreds of false positive results (when an abnormality is detected that isn't really cancer) and dozens of unnecessary biopsies. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/CancerPreventionAndTreatment/answers-mammograms-breast-cancer/story?id=17409110#.UHwrdq7Z3Sg

The Mayo clinic recommends that mammograms be annual starting at age 40.  (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/mammogram-guidelines/AN02052)

In spite of this, there are dangers from mammograms because of the x-rays and false positives: Many women have undergone unnecessary chemotherapy, radiation and mastectomies after receiving false positive results on a mammogram.  http://www.naturalnews.com/033458_mammography_dangers.html

A few comments: I am surprised at the small percentage of breast cancer deaths saved by mammograms.  I thought it was close to 100%.  I am also surprised there is no danger from the extreme compression of the breast in performing mammograms, but I can find no evidence of this:  http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/health/answering-your-questions-about-mammograms/4076/

*  https://www.youtube.com/embed/6e3udzHIiVs?feature=player_detailpage

THE LIGHT

I had already traversed the campus several times, and the light was still on. I had been in a perfect state of drunkenness, and it seemed that everything should be my way.  But The Light, as usual, was on.  At the time I was attending a small, well-known west coast institute of technology.  The light referred to my office where my office mate was sitting.  For some time, I had been pacing about the campus when at the far end of the campus an Indian student shouted, “Hey man!  What are you doing?  You have already walked the campus many times.”

"Come with me, and I'll show you." We walked down the walk, past the famous old oak, until we came to The Light. I pointed up at it and said, "There, do you see that, that light up there? It is on. One night, just one night, I would like to see it off at this time."

For some time this light had bothered me. Oh, it was indeed possible to come when the light was off. For the light went out at exactly 10:30 every night. In some respects, getting to the office before the light was on wasn't too hard, either. All one had to do was get there before 8:15 in the morning, between 11:30 A.M. and 1:00 P.M., or between 4:30 and 6:10 in the evening.  There was a class before 8:15 A.M. so that was no contest, but I hated to rush my supper.  It was only at noon that I was often victorious and was able to tell my office mate’s callers that he was swimming a mile, then having his lunch, and would return between 1 and 1:10 PM.  Yet, I had come to dread walking into the office when The Light was on. My office mate was friendly enough, all right, and quite helpful, but what I had come to dread was his regular habits.  In truth, I was used to being The Student and was strongly affected by the present situation.  Several times I had rushed through my supper in order to get to the office first and turn on The Light. Yet, I knew this to be a Pyrrhic victory, and it was unsatisfying.   What I craved was to go to office at my leisure and still get there first, at least occasionally.

But here I was, pacing back and forth with the light from the office streaming out on me, muttering oaths, dreading the moment that I must enter, noting well that The Light was the only one on in the building.  Sometimes I would stay extra late after my office mate left just to enjoy the light being on because I wanted it on and to play the record player as loudly as I wanted.  Oh, the joy and freedom of it!  But now The Light was on already and here I was cowering before it, out in the dark.

"Once more across the campus," I said. "Just one more time, and then maybe I can stand it."

With this the Indian student left me to my misery and struck out on his own.  On my return from the walk across the campus, I muttered, “What am I!”  With that I pulled out my key and rushed up to the third floor.  I  couldn’t see any light peeking out from under the door, searching for me, laughing at me, nor could I hear any sound from the radio which my office mate always played.  I steeled myself and put the key to the lock, twisted, pushed, and opened the door.

The light beamed out.  I nodded, blinking.  There was a wide-eyed return glance through thick glasses.  “Sounds like Handel,” I said.

“The Messiah,” he replied.

1957
Revised 1999

THE OBAMACARE "COMMITTEE"

One frequently hears about a committee (panel or board) in Obamacare that is going to make judgements about what benefits you will get.  Most recently Mitt Romney made the complaint in the first presidential election debate.  The committee is actually called the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) or, originally the Independent Medicare Advisory Board.  This IPAB is explicitly restricted to making savings without affecting rationing, beneficiary costs, coverage or quality of care , but is given the task of meeting certain goals as to the cost of Medicare.*  Furthermore Congress can overrule the Board with a supermajority vote, but then must find the savings elsewhere.*  Lastly the IPAB consists of 15 members appointed by the president but subject to congressional confirmation.*  The President must consult with the Majority Leader of the Senate on the appointment of three members, the Speaker of the House of Representatives on appointment of three others, and then consult for three each with the Minority Leaders of these two bodies.*  This leaves three to be appointed by the Administration as ex-officio non-voting members.*  The members will serve six years in staggered terms.*

The obfuscation of the real IPAB purpose is, of course, done for political reasons.  IPAB in fact replaces a previous Medicare Payment Advisory Committee (Med Pac) whose recommendation of cuts to Medicare have been ignored by Congress.*  You are advised to read the entire article in Wikipedia.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Payment_Advisory_Board)