I sat today and was watching some video-clips of folks preparing to evacuate out of southern Florida. These were people who'd waited until Thursday or Friday to make the decision....and were short on gas.
The lines were forming, and gas sales was brisk.....with some stations running out.
So what happens in 10 years when all these electrical cars have arrived?
Getting from Miami to central Alabama? It's roughly 700 miles. A Tesla? It might do 240 miles on one good charge. So upon leaving your home....you'd be talking about another charge in five hours. That means at least four to six hours of a charge period, and then if you are lucky.....another five hours of driving time before it's dead.
The odds of you finding power stations for all of your crowd....along the interstate....heading to Alabama or Georgia?
I have this gut feeling around 2030...when one-third of all cars are battery-run.....that when a hurricane episode occurs....most folks are going to stay right there, and give up the idea of evacuation.
Saturday, 31 August 2019
Thursday, 29 August 2019
Omar and the Paramour
For the past couple of days, I've been following this new twisting story of Ilhan Omar....the Democratic Representative.
Unlike the episode of maybe (I emphasize the maybe here) of her at some point being married to a guy-relative, this is a bit more different, and potentially gets you into serious trouble.
So Omar at some point took up with a political adviser-paramour. If you are from Alabama, you kinda know how this goes.
Rep. Ilhan Omar, appears to have paid the political consulting folks (including the paramour), around one-third of her political budget (if the news folks are correct, although I'm still questioning the amount).
What will happen as a minimum? Some ethics group will have to take this apart, and I suspect one of two things will occur: (1) forced resignation (unlikely), or (2) a fine (maybe in the $10k range), but that's probably unlikely too.
Politically, is she damaged? A Muslim married woman having an affair with a regular Christian married guy? Some voters in her district will suggest that there's some bad vibes here, and incorrect behavior on her part. Some idiot might even go and ask if the guy had converted her over to Christianity.
This turning into a b-rated movie for the USA-Network? Well....it sure does have a good script to it.
Unlike the episode of maybe (I emphasize the maybe here) of her at some point being married to a guy-relative, this is a bit more different, and potentially gets you into serious trouble.
So Omar at some point took up with a political adviser-paramour. If you are from Alabama, you kinda know how this goes.
Rep. Ilhan Omar, appears to have paid the political consulting folks (including the paramour), around one-third of her political budget (if the news folks are correct, although I'm still questioning the amount).
What will happen as a minimum? Some ethics group will have to take this apart, and I suspect one of two things will occur: (1) forced resignation (unlikely), or (2) a fine (maybe in the $10k range), but that's probably unlikely too.
Politically, is she damaged? A Muslim married woman having an affair with a regular Christian married guy? Some voters in her district will suggest that there's some bad vibes here, and incorrect behavior on her part. Some idiot might even go and ask if the guy had converted her over to Christianity.
This turning into a b-rated movie for the USA-Network? Well....it sure does have a good script to it.
Monday, 26 August 2019
Murder By the Numbers
There are 3,007 counties in America.
If you take 5-percent of these....the bulk of all murders in America (roughly 57-percent) occur in that group (figure around 150 counties).
An odd statistic? That means that from the other 95-percent (2,890 counties roughly).....have only 43-percent of the murders.
Why?
No one can clearly say.....other than urbanized living probably having more to do with the higher number. So this means that if you live in an urbanized county area.....you have a higher chance of getting murdered? Yes.
Here's the other funny fact.....in roughly 14 counties in Alabama...your chances are a bit higher of being murdered. The other 50-odd counties? Fairly less chance of being murdered.
Urbanization is the driving reason for more murders? Maybe.
If you take 5-percent of these....the bulk of all murders in America (roughly 57-percent) occur in that group (figure around 150 counties).
An odd statistic? That means that from the other 95-percent (2,890 counties roughly).....have only 43-percent of the murders.
Why?
No one can clearly say.....other than urbanized living probably having more to do with the higher number. So this means that if you live in an urbanized county area.....you have a higher chance of getting murdered? Yes.
Here's the other funny fact.....in roughly 14 counties in Alabama...your chances are a bit higher of being murdered. The other 50-odd counties? Fairly less chance of being murdered.
Urbanization is the driving reason for more murders? Maybe.
What Exactly is the Fed?
The Fed (the Federal Reserve System) was created toward the end of December 1913 (Wilson's era)....to be the central banking of America.
It's safe to say that the 1907 'panic' was the wave to create the Fed.
What was the 'panic'? In mid-October 1907, for a three-week period....Wall Street fell apart, and stocks lost around 50-percent of their value. There was a recession around this period, and it helped to create this fear of banks failing. Yes, folks got real nervous and ran off to the banks to get their money, and found that banks simply didn't have the cash like they were promised.
Yeah, I know.....1907 never gets brought up much. Kinda odd, I admit....that 22 years later....the same 'panic' occurs.
Was there an integral part to the 1907 'panic'? Well....yes. You see some folks felt they could arrange things and take up ownership of copper (to corner the market, as they say). Silly, you might say today, but this was a big deal in 1907.
Congress sat and talked about this episode, and what they wanted.....more or less....was a watch-dog. Six years went into this talk, and what you got was the Federal Reserve Act. There were three jobs here...(1) moderating long-term interest rates for the government, (2) ensuring employment stayed stable, and (3) keeping prices throughout the economy.....stable.
Some folks will say that the Fed has done a great job. Some folks (particularly economists) will say they've often failed at their job.
The Fed efforts in 1929 and decade after the Wall Street collapse? Most historians will say that the Fed wandered around and failed on two of the three jobs (suggesting they did keep prices stable).
So here we are....Trump on their case, with a recession on the horizon. He expects the Fed to accomplish their act on the three requirements. Some folks think that the Fed is there mostly to protect the banks now, and the private American is a lesser priority. Holding the Fed to do their job? Well....the President can't really fire them, and Congress can't really monitor or direct them. So it's like a fourth element of the government (after the Supreme Court, the President, and Congress).
If the Fed refuses to do their job now? Recession will be a harsh matter, and Trump will blame them every step of the way. The Fed will mostly grin over the matter and laugh. The public? They may reach a point where the Fed has to be totally gutted by the House, and a whole new mechanism might have to be developed. The sad thing? It'll be the same three requirements as listed in 1913....assigned to them yet again.
It's safe to say that the 1907 'panic' was the wave to create the Fed.
What was the 'panic'? In mid-October 1907, for a three-week period....Wall Street fell apart, and stocks lost around 50-percent of their value. There was a recession around this period, and it helped to create this fear of banks failing. Yes, folks got real nervous and ran off to the banks to get their money, and found that banks simply didn't have the cash like they were promised.
Yeah, I know.....1907 never gets brought up much. Kinda odd, I admit....that 22 years later....the same 'panic' occurs.
Was there an integral part to the 1907 'panic'? Well....yes. You see some folks felt they could arrange things and take up ownership of copper (to corner the market, as they say). Silly, you might say today, but this was a big deal in 1907.
Congress sat and talked about this episode, and what they wanted.....more or less....was a watch-dog. Six years went into this talk, and what you got was the Federal Reserve Act. There were three jobs here...(1) moderating long-term interest rates for the government, (2) ensuring employment stayed stable, and (3) keeping prices throughout the economy.....stable.
Some folks will say that the Fed has done a great job. Some folks (particularly economists) will say they've often failed at their job.
The Fed efforts in 1929 and decade after the Wall Street collapse? Most historians will say that the Fed wandered around and failed on two of the three jobs (suggesting they did keep prices stable).
So here we are....Trump on their case, with a recession on the horizon. He expects the Fed to accomplish their act on the three requirements. Some folks think that the Fed is there mostly to protect the banks now, and the private American is a lesser priority. Holding the Fed to do their job? Well....the President can't really fire them, and Congress can't really monitor or direct them. So it's like a fourth element of the government (after the Supreme Court, the President, and Congress).
If the Fed refuses to do their job now? Recession will be a harsh matter, and Trump will blame them every step of the way. The Fed will mostly grin over the matter and laugh. The public? They may reach a point where the Fed has to be totally gutted by the House, and a whole new mechanism might have to be developed. The sad thing? It'll be the same three requirements as listed in 1913....assigned to them yet again.
Sunday, 25 August 2019
The Problem With a Democratic Candidate Dealing with the Recession
So you write up this scenario. Trump enters 2020, with a recession. You need an angle to counter him and to gain your respect for dealing with the recession. The program?
Cash for clunker program?
Gutting the budget by ten-percent and promising to cut taxes (while swearing that you are a Democrat)?
Give some tax advantages to US companies?
Telling people you can force the Fed to act?
Swearing to folks that no Green program will occur and inflict massive cost upon Americans?
Convincing the general public that you can get stock prices back up, with your policies?
Which Democrat from 15-odd characters has that capability to convince you? Warren? Sanders?
Yeah, it's a bit crazy to imagine this scenario, and some Democrat from the group who has this ability to act like a Republican for four years.
Cash for clunker program?
Gutting the budget by ten-percent and promising to cut taxes (while swearing that you are a Democrat)?
Give some tax advantages to US companies?
Telling people you can force the Fed to act?
Swearing to folks that no Green program will occur and inflict massive cost upon Americans?
Convincing the general public that you can get stock prices back up, with your policies?
Which Democrat from 15-odd characters has that capability to convince you? Warren? Sanders?
Yeah, it's a bit crazy to imagine this scenario, and some Democrat from the group who has this ability to act like a Republican for four years.
The Snack Story
Generally, this might mean a sandwich or decent item....with a Coke.
So the Stewardess came along and handed out these....a crispy candy bar, and a Coke.
That was it.
For rating 'snacks'....on a scale of one to ten....this was probably a '2'. But that's the thing about airlines today, they've come to realize that folks aren't happy anyway, so why spend any real money on a stupid snack. I doubt if Lufthansa spent more than 35 cents for the 'snack'.
But this also tells the story of why so many people go and buy things to take along on flights....like apples, Pop-Tarts, Milk Duds, etc.
Friday, 23 August 2019
Cross-Blade Encounter
It was made for one single year (2002), and only comes in the 599 cc range (71 hp).
It's rare that you come across these now.
Smart didn't really know how to sell the car, or to market it. No, there is no top to it, and that might be 50-percent of the problem why it never caught on. No windshield? That is correct. No doors? Yep. Top speed? Around 130 kph (80 mph). No trunk? Correct, that space in the back is for the engine. For beaches or sand? No.....it's a rear wheel drive situation.
Maybe if this had been manufactured in Brazil, and sold for 7k dollars.....it would have been an interesting car to keep in the garage and use on weekends. The chief problem I saw in 2002 when it came out....they were talking 15,000 dollars (European-made and added cost on labor).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)