I watched this 90-second piece on MSNBC with Brian Williams and his guest....Mara Gay. So the comment was made...that this $500-million that Bloomberg spent....could have been spent, and given all 327-million Americans a million each, and still had money left over.
I watched it twice....to make sure what I heard. Then I did the math. I'm not a rocket scientist, electrical engineer, or physics PhD guy. My high school math teach did give me some basic math tools, and they still linger today.
If you figure up the Bloomberg money, and gave it to the public.....we each would have gotten around $1.53. In basic terms....it would pay for a cheap cup of coffee and one cheap donut (not even the Dunkin type). You couldn't even buy a bucket of popcorn at the theater, or a premium beer at the bar, or a table dance with that Memphis stripper visiting Gadsden this week.
In fact, you couldn't even buy a six-pack of Pepsi, unless it was on sale at Wal-Mart. You might be able to buy ultra cheap bottle of discounted wine. English Leather cologne? It would have only paid 40-percent of the cost of that bottle.
So this exchange between Williams and Gay? It was like two marginalized 3rd-grade kids and talking over numbers but not able to grasp the value of numbers.
This is the sad dilemma for Americans today. They watch people like this and sit there at the kitchen table with their Tandy calculator for 30 minutes....trying to figure out how you'd get a million from Bloomberg, with MSNBC numbers, and it never adds up. Eventually, you figure the Tandy calculator is crapped out (after 38 years of service and you throw it into the trash). Then 'Randy' (your 8-year old son) comes in and looks at the data and says the Tandy calculator was correct. You wipe a tear away.....drag the calculator out of the trash and thank Randy for his insight and brilliance.
Randy might be going off to college one day, and inherit the Tandy calculator.
Friday, 6 March 2020
Thursday, 5 March 2020
What I'd Do For Chuck
After reading over the chatter by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and his chatter toward the Supreme Court.....I'd go to three solutions:
1. I'd treat him as if he were an employee of mine, and ask the guy to take a anger-management class (as soon as possible on starting this).
2. I'd mark him down for a week of leave....due to stress. I might even suggest camping out in the Smokies, or bass-fishing in Mississippi.
3. Then I'd warn him that he'd be denied entry into the Senate for a month, if he ever repeated that type of chatter again. If he wanted to stay around his office, or just make campaign stops in NY....fine.
A lot of people are reaching the level where they can't be civil or courteous anymore. If they don't like the President....tough, because it's a four-year deal, and you have to work with what the Constitution gives to you. If you aren't made of the 'right stuff'.....maybe you ought to get into real estate, or professional rodeo riding.
1. I'd treat him as if he were an employee of mine, and ask the guy to take a anger-management class (as soon as possible on starting this).
2. I'd mark him down for a week of leave....due to stress. I might even suggest camping out in the Smokies, or bass-fishing in Mississippi.
3. Then I'd warn him that he'd be denied entry into the Senate for a month, if he ever repeated that type of chatter again. If he wanted to stay around his office, or just make campaign stops in NY....fine.
A lot of people are reaching the level where they can't be civil or courteous anymore. If they don't like the President....tough, because it's a four-year deal, and you have to work with what the Constitution gives to you. If you aren't made of the 'right stuff'.....maybe you ought to get into real estate, or professional rodeo riding.
The Problem With the Second Amendment
It reads quiet simply:
It was written purely as a right, not as a limitation. In fact, it literally took the city, state and federal government out of the discussion over 'arms'. If they had stopped at the word 'State' and said that should not be infringed, then this whole gun discussion would have ended fifty to one-hundred years ago, and various weapons would have been seized already on tens of thousands of occasions.
The problem now? The term 'militia'.
You don't call a militia up to restock grocery shelves.
You don't call a militia up to re-sod a baseball field over at the school.
You don't call a militia up to fill sandbags for the approaching flood.
You don't call for help from a militia because of a blizzard, or hurricane.
You don't ask a militia to stop a forest fire, drain a swamp, or resolve a failing dam.
In fact, for most people....you'd rather not be in the situation where a militia resolution is required.
You'd rather not be standing in the midst of house where the front-door has been busted down at 1 AM. You'd rather not be standing at a grocery where some nutcase has threaten to kill some grocery clerks or retiree customers. You'd rather not be standing in a church where some meth-fueled nutcase has quoted John the Baptist while waving a shotgun around. You'd prefer not to be standing in the coffee shop when some deranged nutcase has a machete and threatening to kill Rita....the gal who has served you coffee daily for the past five years.
The sad thing is that in the late 1700s....when you needed a militia....it came to resolve problems.
For the past 200-odd years, the militia (sometimes numbering just one single guy) has been the difference in resolving a threat.
For those with opposition to the 2nd amendment....if you wanted to make your case, all you have to do is eliminate the need for any militia to exist. Bring world-peace to your neighborhood....erase nutcase threats in the literal sense....and make every single inch of the nation 'safe'.
Once you've accomplished that....then perhaps the need for the militia can finally go away.
I know....it's a big challenge. But if you were like the Gandhi-guy, wouldn't you desire to go out and bring peace to every inch of the country, and ensure nutcases never threaten anyone? Just stop assaults, robberies, physical threats, and house the mentally insane who threaten people.
And just a tip....if your peace approach on the non-peaceful people fails.....maybe you ought to remember a member or two (militia folks), and ask briefly for their help. It's not a terrible thing to know that they are around.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
It was written purely as a right, not as a limitation. In fact, it literally took the city, state and federal government out of the discussion over 'arms'. If they had stopped at the word 'State' and said that should not be infringed, then this whole gun discussion would have ended fifty to one-hundred years ago, and various weapons would have been seized already on tens of thousands of occasions.
The problem now? The term 'militia'.
You don't call a militia up to restock grocery shelves.
You don't call a militia up to re-sod a baseball field over at the school.
You don't call a militia up to fill sandbags for the approaching flood.
You don't call for help from a militia because of a blizzard, or hurricane.
You don't ask a militia to stop a forest fire, drain a swamp, or resolve a failing dam.
In fact, for most people....you'd rather not be in the situation where a militia resolution is required.
You'd rather not be standing in the midst of house where the front-door has been busted down at 1 AM. You'd rather not be standing at a grocery where some nutcase has threaten to kill some grocery clerks or retiree customers. You'd rather not be standing in a church where some meth-fueled nutcase has quoted John the Baptist while waving a shotgun around. You'd prefer not to be standing in the coffee shop when some deranged nutcase has a machete and threatening to kill Rita....the gal who has served you coffee daily for the past five years.
The sad thing is that in the late 1700s....when you needed a militia....it came to resolve problems.
For the past 200-odd years, the militia (sometimes numbering just one single guy) has been the difference in resolving a threat.
For those with opposition to the 2nd amendment....if you wanted to make your case, all you have to do is eliminate the need for any militia to exist. Bring world-peace to your neighborhood....erase nutcase threats in the literal sense....and make every single inch of the nation 'safe'.
Once you've accomplished that....then perhaps the need for the militia can finally go away.
I know....it's a big challenge. But if you were like the Gandhi-guy, wouldn't you desire to go out and bring peace to every inch of the country, and ensure nutcases never threaten anyone? Just stop assaults, robberies, physical threats, and house the mentally insane who threaten people.
And just a tip....if your peace approach on the non-peaceful people fails.....maybe you ought to remember a member or two (militia folks), and ask briefly for their help. It's not a terrible thing to know that they are around.
Wednesday, 4 March 2020
Bloomberg Path Finished
Yep. Over $500-million spent. And as of this hour, he's resigned from the campaign.
It's strictly a race between Sanders and Biden to reach the convention now. Neither, I suspect, will have the numbers on the first ballot.
It's strictly a race between Sanders and Biden to reach the convention now. Neither, I suspect, will have the numbers on the first ballot.
The Brokered Convention and the VP Choice
At this point, it's safe to say that it's a race between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden. Bloomberg? He has the money to carry the race onto the end, and willing to spend another quarter-billion easily, but if he doesn't win at least five or six states....he has zero standing in a brokered deal. Can you imagine getting to the second round of the convention and his name is put up as the brokered candidate, then the number of state wins is only two or three? Bernie and Joe delegates will just be standing there and laughing.
So the question comes down to an important part of the race. Joe Biden is in serious trouble still with Ukraine deal and facing a likely impeachment once (if) he wins. On top of that, a second impeachment charge could come up, over his mental state (dementia). So the VP matters.
Then the question arises over Bernie Sanders if his health is crappy, and maybe he'll need to be replaced in the first twelve months.
So as they emerge out of the first ballot at the convention....the real discussion is....who either would choose for a VP, and the likely odds that they'd end up as President (under the various issues).
Is this going to be more of an election of Trump running against the VP? Yes. That's the funny part of the path ahead.
So the question comes down to an important part of the race. Joe Biden is in serious trouble still with Ukraine deal and facing a likely impeachment once (if) he wins. On top of that, a second impeachment charge could come up, over his mental state (dementia). So the VP matters.
Then the question arises over Bernie Sanders if his health is crappy, and maybe he'll need to be replaced in the first twelve months.
So as they emerge out of the first ballot at the convention....the real discussion is....who either would choose for a VP, and the likely odds that they'd end up as President (under the various issues).
Is this going to be more of an election of Trump running against the VP? Yes. That's the funny part of the path ahead.
Five Things From Super-Tuesday Efforts
1. Bloomberg may have picked up a delegate or two.....but the results of the day suggest that he hasn't changed the race in any fashion. The millions spent? Worth nothing. He should have held out.....gone as a independent, and waged the billion dollars on a 3rd party effort. At this point, if he shows up at the Convention as a marginalized candidate....the 2nd ballot gimmick would be a joke if he were the nominee.
2. Bernie Sanders 'social-vision' doesn't sell in the south. The numbers from various states suggest that.
3. If you'd asked most political analysts the worst duo to run in the 2nd half of the primary season.....Biden and Sanders are it.
4. Zero chance that a first round ballot will conclude at the Democratic convention with a 'winner'.
5. The real winner out of the Super-Tuesday voting? Donald Trump.
2. Bernie Sanders 'social-vision' doesn't sell in the south. The numbers from various states suggest that.
3. If you'd asked most political analysts the worst duo to run in the 2nd half of the primary season.....Biden and Sanders are it.
4. Zero chance that a first round ballot will conclude at the Democratic convention with a 'winner'.
5. The real winner out of the Super-Tuesday voting? Donald Trump.
Tuesday, 3 March 2020
Why the High Death Count in Wuhan?
I've sat and pondered over the numbers by the WHO.
Roughly 67,000 cases of the Coronavirus in the Hubei Province (Wuhan City). Of that.....2,803 deaths. If you use the latest WHO data....in the past 24 hours, there's been 42 deaths in the city from the virus.
But here's the thing....then you enlarge the data from the rest of China (the rest of the provinces)....it's only 13,000 more cases of sick people, and roughly 100 dead folks.
So this makes one ask the stupid question....why Wuhan got the bulk of the infected, and the bulk of deaths?
I would suggest that three significant factors fell into play:
1. Somewhere back in October of 2019....a couple of sick folks (probably from the fish market operation) showed up in serious condition and everything seemed to be pointed toward pneumonia. Doctors and nurses in the initial treatment area didn't protect themselves much in that initial round.
So a week into this.....as those seriously affected passed on, the medical staff, nurses, and doctors who were treating these folks became infected, and started to pass it along to others they were associating with and treating.
Adding to this initial period....the pneumonia-like folks were passing the disease onto other regular patients of the hospital system across the city. Folks who were there for knee operations, car accidents, or whatever....got infected, and went home to pass their coronavirus onto family members.
By mid-November, there was a heck of a lot of pneumonia going on....way more than the statistics should be, and triggered more of an investigation. By this point, it was too late.
Those doctors and nurses affected? They got pretty sick by mid-November and were checking into the hospitals themselves. More doctors and nurses were called in, and they were infected as well....passing it along at a hearty speed.
By early to mid-December, the authorities probably figured out the virus business, but the infection rate was way beyond their control at that point, and a massive number of nurses and doctors were missing....who would have helped patients to survive.
2. The pollution factor of Wuhan? This rarely gets brought up, but if you dig up the numbers....it's one of the densely polluted areas of China. It's been that way for at least two decades.....as the city of 11-million crew at fantastic speed.
No one talks about weakened breathing issues but if you were a guy who worked outdoor, or had the window to the office open.....you got a big dose of pollution daily.
I suspect with weakened lungs.....your odds with the medical system and the virus were severely limited.
3. Finally, I come to something that a lot of Americans and Brits talk about when visiting China....bad sanitary habits. Poor hygiene habits are often discussed and you will be given a list of a hundred things which visitors observe when going into China.
In the case of this virus.....it got plenty of help from local people, and the hygiene situation.
All of these three things add up.
I'll add this comment over the Italian numbers which might fit in as well.....when you look at the 35 Italian deaths (to this point)....I suspect if you listed the ages of these people, the bulk are over the age of 65. I suspect Wuhan's death count....with those over 65....is fairly hefty.
So if you were to look at comparisons.....I don't think a serious death count in Europe or the US will occur. When you do find rates going higher, it'll be because of poor sanitation, poor hygiene, over the age of 65, immunity issues, and lung problems.
Roughly 67,000 cases of the Coronavirus in the Hubei Province (Wuhan City). Of that.....2,803 deaths. If you use the latest WHO data....in the past 24 hours, there's been 42 deaths in the city from the virus.
But here's the thing....then you enlarge the data from the rest of China (the rest of the provinces)....it's only 13,000 more cases of sick people, and roughly 100 dead folks.
So this makes one ask the stupid question....why Wuhan got the bulk of the infected, and the bulk of deaths?
I would suggest that three significant factors fell into play:
1. Somewhere back in October of 2019....a couple of sick folks (probably from the fish market operation) showed up in serious condition and everything seemed to be pointed toward pneumonia. Doctors and nurses in the initial treatment area didn't protect themselves much in that initial round.
So a week into this.....as those seriously affected passed on, the medical staff, nurses, and doctors who were treating these folks became infected, and started to pass it along to others they were associating with and treating.
Adding to this initial period....the pneumonia-like folks were passing the disease onto other regular patients of the hospital system across the city. Folks who were there for knee operations, car accidents, or whatever....got infected, and went home to pass their coronavirus onto family members.
By mid-November, there was a heck of a lot of pneumonia going on....way more than the statistics should be, and triggered more of an investigation. By this point, it was too late.
Those doctors and nurses affected? They got pretty sick by mid-November and were checking into the hospitals themselves. More doctors and nurses were called in, and they were infected as well....passing it along at a hearty speed.
By early to mid-December, the authorities probably figured out the virus business, but the infection rate was way beyond their control at that point, and a massive number of nurses and doctors were missing....who would have helped patients to survive.
2. The pollution factor of Wuhan? This rarely gets brought up, but if you dig up the numbers....it's one of the densely polluted areas of China. It's been that way for at least two decades.....as the city of 11-million crew at fantastic speed.
No one talks about weakened breathing issues but if you were a guy who worked outdoor, or had the window to the office open.....you got a big dose of pollution daily.
I suspect with weakened lungs.....your odds with the medical system and the virus were severely limited.
3. Finally, I come to something that a lot of Americans and Brits talk about when visiting China....bad sanitary habits. Poor hygiene habits are often discussed and you will be given a list of a hundred things which visitors observe when going into China.
In the case of this virus.....it got plenty of help from local people, and the hygiene situation.
All of these three things add up.
I'll add this comment over the Italian numbers which might fit in as well.....when you look at the 35 Italian deaths (to this point)....I suspect if you listed the ages of these people, the bulk are over the age of 65. I suspect Wuhan's death count....with those over 65....is fairly hefty.
So if you were to look at comparisons.....I don't think a serious death count in Europe or the US will occur. When you do find rates going higher, it'll be because of poor sanitation, poor hygiene, over the age of 65, immunity issues, and lung problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)