What is the big deal?

I apologize that most of this is vague. A question arose at work about the design of a particular piece of equipment. This piece of equipment failed and now needed to be repaired. Timing is of the essence, the shop could get it back to us faster if we just made one small modification to the equipment design. As you well know, most process equipment is designed with safeguards and overbuild for future expansion. This one had a unique design of tubes that allowed increased flow for the same diameter. So the repair shop suggested that we could save some time if we just eliminated this "weird" design. No big deal, right? Wrong, the change would have resulted in a loss of capacity of 20%!!! This tiny thing changed the whole capability by 20%.
Lessons learned: so often we think that tiny or incremental changes won't hurt and often these changes make things easier right now, but as we look into the future, this small change could limit us forever. Do things the best way you know how, stop and fix the problem the best way you know how when you find out they are wrong, and make sure that change is for the better.
I still can't believe such a small thing is worth 20% of the total capacity!

Lets go to the Fair

I always love the way the government reports the amount of money it can expect to receive for certain taxes. The carbon tax...makes no sense...they want to tax the energy, chemical, and manufacturing industries (i.e. the only people that make things in the US). Comparing our country to a body, the way Paul of the New Testament described the Church as a body. If the government is the head, agriculture is the legs, industry is the back, and finance is the arms. Then in the last 20 years of progressive socialism, we have gotten a big head, cut off our legs and tied our hands behind our broken back.
If you have ever had business dealings in countries outside of the US, you will understand how easily laws and/or officials can be persuaded to bend the system to give an unfair advantage to a particular player. The people of the United States have built businesses and competed in an almost fair system (the most fair of any in the world, I would argue.) It is this fairness that has encouraged competition, has challenged status quo, has given rise to some of the wealthiest people on the planet; wealth created not by land or resources but by industry, ingenuity, and competition.
More on taxes later.

Universal Healthcare

I think there is a gulf of misunderstanding between 'liberals' and 'conservatives' or as I like to call them, people that want, want, WANT, gimme, gimme, GIMME party and the people that read the Constitution, government stay-out-of-my-business party. From my conversations with advocates of universal healthcare, I hear the points,
-Everyone deserves and needs access to quality medical care. Think of the children
-The cost of healthcare is too high for an individual or family to pay directly.
-People without insurance usually don't pay anyway, so that drives up the cost of healthcare and insurance for those that pay
-Government is the only entity big enough to run an universal healthcare program.
The truth
-Right now, everyone in this country can get quality healthcare
-The concept of insurance is rediculous, a person getting insurance bets that he will get sick, the insurance company bets that the person won't get sick. They then charge person a fee that is higher than the break even point of the equation. That is why the insurance company only pays for certain procedures. It is simple math. (Medical Cost x likelihood + profit)/(group of insured people) = Cost to individual Therefore, healthy people that pay for unused insurance that subsidizes sick people.
-People that receive a service from a healthcare provider should pay for the service. Healthcare is a service INDUSTRY sure doctors love to help people, but they also want to get paid for their work just as a carpenter gets paid for work. There are many places to go and receive healthcare free of charge.
-The truth is that conservatives want everyone to have healthcare, they just don't want the government to run it. It goes completely against the US Constitution. There needs to be multiple insurance providers, otherwise, the quality of healthcare becomes narrowly focused on particular procedures that are paid for and totally rejects the procedures that are newer or more risky. The government will have the ability to bully doctors into whatever suits the government. Basically, the government will be able to decide who lives and who dies.

A note to the President

I am an average citizen that cares about his country, I care about freedom and liberty, and I feel that our country took form as a place where dreams could be followed. That has changed, many people today are not as concerned about their indiviual families and dreams as about the decisions being made by government. The US constitution was written to establish a government to protect the people. Please, protect us, physically. Freedom and the pursuit of dreams will give us jobs.

Robin Hood

My wife was reading to me her response to a question asked by a friend.

The question went, "If I cannot make the money my family needs, is the government obligated to give me my neighbor's money?"

She asks the follow-up question revealing just how ridiculous the concept is. Her reply, "What about IQ's and intelligence? Are we going to take smart people's brains and give part to the dumb because the dumb ones can't think as well?

Well, guess what, Robin Hood, DID NOT WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT! Robin Hood stole from rich government to give to the poor, brutally TAXED people. The government wanted to fund government initiatives and to give support to its cronies. He was a hero because he gave the STOLEN money back to the people. I am sure the government officials said, "We are giving YOU all these programs and big buildings so that you and everyone else can use them." That is a lie! It is a scam! It is like charities that have 50% administrative costs.

There are many reasons why the revolutionary war was fought, and why Americans felt the need to be independent but the last straw that broke the camel's back, the firing pin that released the rage of the American people was TAXES. The people felt that they were being unfairly taxed. They wanted a freedom not offered anywhere else in the world. We did not want to be tied to the social requirements of Europeans, of Asians, or of Africans. Everyone who has historically come to the US has wanted the same thing, "to be free." Americans have always been deeply independent, they don't want people to get something for nothing. In America, everyone can or could acheive based on his or her own merits. The old world had too much NEPOTISM. The people could not acheive because others with power and wealth limited them in some way. As Americans if we want to start a business, we do it; if we want to move to a different area, we go; if we want a different religion, we join it. We don't want anyone telling us what to do with our time, money, or beliefs. We are a free people.

The main problem we face today is that other people can vote to take away our freedoms. Where is the next New World? Where can those who will not be enslaved by mob mentality or by opressive laws go to maintain their freedom? I will do anything to be free! I will only be ruled on principles of freedom. I don't want to force anyone to anything.

Now, is this concept of freedom limited in its view? What about "the greater good?" What about when some people have to die so that others may live? This question requires that free peope unite and make decisions that everyone, well at least a majority can agree on. Now we are back to the questions about government, its purpose and existence. Government exists to protect its people, to ensure the rights of the people, to prevent people including domestic enemies from hurting others. That includes regulating and punishing people that disadvantage others physically (including health and safety), financially, and intellectually. Government enacts laws to protect its people from would be criminals in banking, industry, and the nations lands and environment. These laws should state what is or is not acceptable. Examples would be, "It is not acceptable to steal from any person or company." "It is not acceptable to attack or hurt another person." "It is not acceptable to release toxins into the environment." These are the basics. This is the tree trunk to which our government should cling. It should do nothing else.

Government programs are a SCAM. Education should be supported by the individuals receiving an education. Healthcare, this one blows my mind, why is government involved at all? If a doctor or clinic, or hospital hurts people, they should be put out of existence by the government. Social security, elderly should be supported by families, church and/or people in the community. I would like to elaborate, but I don't have the time. And besides, there are TOO MANY government programs to attack. But the principle that they operate on is a scam. Their budgets are determined purely by the number of participants involved in the program. Federal and State Programs like WIC, medicare, food stamps, low income housing, and etc. receive budgets based on how many people they support. They have to go to these governing bodies and say, "Look, look at all the people involved in our program, we NEED more money, give it to us and if you don't, we can't HELP your electorate. And we will tell your electorate that YOU won't help them."

Our current government (both Republican and Democrat alike) is about power and greed, and keeping those in power just like dictators and kings of old. Well, I, as a citizen of the United States, who gives power to the government to rule over me, find that it is NOT acceptable for government to steal from me, enslave me or prevent my right to live in freedom. Is there anyone out there who agrees with me?

Auto Industry

Have you ever thought that this years car sales aren't great because the cars and trucks they are selling just aren't that impressive? I look at the biggest names that come to my mind in America: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Toyota, Nissan, and Honda. Is there anything really revolutionary about the cars they are making this year that is better than last year? Is there any safety system that has proven it can dramatically save lives? Is there any with an attractive design that draws people in by the groves? The answer is NO. What has the auto industry really done? They offer a "new" car, just like the old one only newer. It rides like the old one did when the old one was new. It stops like the old one when the old one was new. It is just like the old one but with a "new car smell." If the government would stay out of things (both in causing the problem and in fixing it!) Capitalism would ensure the best competition and the fastest improvements. That is capitalism's purpose. If the auto industry doesn't give us something we want or need, someone else will! We will replace the stuffy corporate big wigs with a revolutionary generation of changers. Capitalism is great! It provides a way so that any convincing person with a good idea can change the world.

Auto industry has lost its luster, the solution is may not be smaller cars or alternative energy, it may be an entirely new system. If it is mass transport, flying machines, working from home, automated assembly, scanning and "beaming." I don't know, but it is something other than what we are currently doing.

Guess what is the problem with my solution? Yes, government. Government officials through ear marks, social programs, grants, and etc as ceased to work for the greater good. Government "by the people" has ceased to exist because they are so in thrall with what the can do for the society that they have forgotten what they should do for society. They should keep everything simple (from heath care, to taxes, to defense.) Government should be easy to understand and transparent. Government officials through their own ambitions have created loopholes and hidden systems for themselves and their friends to take advantage of the American people.

In an effort to get certain candidates elected, media has ceased to educate the people on issues and prefers only to bash and bolt. Media should be unbiased (which we know is impossible) therefore they should provide all biases so that truth might more easily be uncovered.

Economic Crisis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL36nwCSYUM

If you want to know why we are in the economic boat we are in, please watch this video.

John McCain

I found this exerpt with John McCain from four years ago. It is nice to see someone in politics that doesn't change with every new headline.

Were dinosaurs on the earth 4000 years ago?

The most important question Matt Damon can ask of Sarah Palin is about dinosaurs? He says that he needs to know her answer to this question because she will have the nuclear codes...


I don't think Matt really understood the question or the reason he asked the question.

While she was governor of Alaska, she worked to get the theory of creation taught side-by-side with the theory of evolution. Don't be fooled by the sarcastic, condescending tone in Matt Damon's voice, he obviously supports Sarah Palin, as I will explain.

When it comes to the nuclear codes and nuclear weapons, it is the privilege of this nation to hold the most destructive weapon in the world at its command. If there was ever a question about the need to use these weapons, we would want that question to be answered by someone with equity and fairness. We would want someone who looked past popular belief or opinion polls and would consider all available views.

The decision to drop two nuclear bombs on Japan was probably the most difficult ever made during WWII. It was a decision that Harry Truman had to live with for the rest of his life. He authorized the deaths of thousands of civilians, innocent people dragged into a war waged by their government in the pursuit of pride and power. President Truman had to balance these people's lives with the lives of thousands of others who might have had to die in order to end the war. Eventually, he made the decision to dissolve the lives of more than 100,000 people. History looks back and judges him both as a hero and a murderer. So be it, but they never had to balance lives as he did.

But what if the question to use the destructive power of a nuclear weapon was presented to a biased and prejudice person? What if that person only saw the world in one way, and considered all other ways to be childish, silly, or simply beneath their stature? Or what if that question came to someone who considered the definition of life to be above their right or ability to determine? The results would be devastating. If they were absolutely opposed to the use, the consequences could be catastrophic; if they were trigger happy and had no value for life, the results could be equally catastrophic. Judge for yourself who should hold the "nuclear codes." And remember nothing in this world ever has just one side.

History-making

Well, I hope you are as involved in this election as I am. I have taken the opportunity to watch some of both the DNC and the RNC. These events function as a way to display to the country the person who will be nominated for election from each of the political parties. I have read and listened to the news containing quotes and highlights from the candidates and prominent party members' speeches. I have to say that they mislead and confuse the audience against the truth, they bias and misconstrue facts! They present the views only of the journalist without bearing on the candidates, their qualities or positions. I ask you, my dear friends, why? Why do we need these journalists, reporters, and commentators? What value do they add to the story, what do they provide that we cannot possibly comprehend by reading or hearing the actual speech? If you objectively want to know which candidate most completely aligns with your views, just listen. You don't need sarcastic comments, you don't need flattering overtones, you need truth, and you need facts. Do you think that journalists want truth? Do you think they want facts? No, they want to sell! They are ENTERTAINERS!
Throughout this election, I have heard talk of making history...the first African American, the first woman, the first yadda yadda yadda...who cares? Why should we care whether we elect the first of anything? I liked the way Rudy Giuliani tried to phrase the question we should ask ourselves. The American people have two resumes presented to them, each with the names and political party removed from them. We read the resumes, interview the candidates ad select the best person for the job. It doesn't matter if that person has race, gender, religion, age, or handicap. So many people have fought to eliminate these barriers, these unfounded, unimportant prejudices. We have made great strides in accepting everyone into the American culture. Those journalists that claim history making events are perpetuating inequality. They are accentuating differences. They retreat into their on stereotyping prejudices. Again I ask, "what value do they add?" History-making...a history-making event would be to select a Congressional or Executive candidate based solely on their qualifications and not on the political, do-nothing commentators.
I have heard this Congress called the "do-nothing" Congress. I have heard our President called a "lame duck." But who is making these comments, and what value do these comments add to our society? If you want to know something, go to the source.
Don't get me wrong, media has a purpose in politics. They should keep polititians honest, they should expose truth and facts that politicians often try to blur. But the moment they begin to write commentary, they become entertainers.