Tuesday, November 29, 2016

RIGHT TO WORK LAWS

This title is a perversion, a code name for what “Right to Work” laws actually are.

“Right to Work” laws actually allow employers to terminate individual workers for any reason all or for no reason at all.

I have worked in a state that has been a “right to work” state since before I moved here many years ago. My employer has never taken issue with my employment so for me this argument is abstract.

However, from my own standpoint, I believe that “Right to Work” laws should be more accurately named “Right to Fire” laws. It is laws like these that push non union workers toward unionizing.



TERM LIMITS


A constitutional amendment creating term limits for both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives is something that should be strongly considered.
Please continue reading to understand why I believe that something so drastic as an amendment to our constitution is necessary.

Two Hurdles:
1.We cannot count on our legislators to address this term limits. A new legislator would be excommunicated if they even mentioned term limits by senior legislators and senior staffers who currently utilize OUR legislative branch as a career. Even if term limit legislation was introduced, powerful career politicians would not allow proposed term limit legislation to even come to the floor for a vote.
Without term limits, voters won't simply vote out senior legislators because…
The two major parties have systems within the legislative branch to reward senior legislators with more (unequal) power to “bring home the bacon” to their own constituency. So local constituencies return the senior legislator to office to get their “lion’s share”. This allows senior legislators to build “bridges to nowhere” in order to bring money to their districts while more important business of the legislative branch goes unattended.
The forefathers saw elected office as a public service, not a career.[i]
Some situations change and we have to change to keep up. However, the longer legislators stay in office the more opportunities for corruption come their way and the more they are influenced by special interests.
So, due to these “hurdles”, a constitutional amendment from the grassroots[ii] is not only the best but probably the only way to bring about term limits.

Proposal:
A two term lifetime limit for all congressional/senate offices. No lobbying for a period of seven years for each term elected (even if office is abandoned early).
A two term lifetime limit for all Congressional/Senate staffers. (These people often become more powerful than the elected officials they serve under.) So, neither should staffing be a career.

Keeping current:
There is a "Convention of States Action" movement (President Mark Meckler). This organization seeks to decrease the power of the Federal government. I don't yet know that much about the organization but in so far as utilizing Article V of the U.S. constitution to create a constitution amendment for term limits, they have my guarded support. ("Guarded" support is given because some organizations wind up going to extreme- my support is limited to term limits)
To evaluate this movement for yourself, go to




[i] So all retirement benefits too should be greatly reduced.
[ii] the common or ordinary people, especially as contrasted with the leadership or elite of a political party, social organization, etc.; the rank and file.- Dictionary.com

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / SOCIALISM EqualOpportunity-Under the United States system of government all citize

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY  /  SOCIALISM

Equal Opportunity-
Under the United States system of government all citizens have the right to pursue any level of socioeconomic success that they desire. This does not mean that all citizens will start on the same socioeconomic level. This does not mean that citizens will automatically be supported in their pursuit. However, there are many private and public enterprises that exist just to invest in those who show potential and desire. For the individual, this means that these opportunities must be earned.

I enjoy a moderate amount of financial security after a lifetime of working. I grew up in a poor factory town. I worked fulltime while attending college. (Thank-you to my coworkers who helped cover my shifts.) I also married a wonderful lady who contributed to my wellbeing.

POINT IS…
I have worked a lifetime to earn things that socialists want given to them.


BEST ADVICE…
Move to your favorite socialist country. Really GO and enjoy all the benefits. I am not joking. I think that anyone who truly believes in socialism should move to a socialist country much like legal immigrants move to our country pursuing what they believe will lead to a better life. GO seek your better life in a socialist country.

MY APOLOGIES…

My apologies to socialists for using the “e” word in this paper… but I did use that “g” word that you like so much once!

Saturday, November 5, 2016

Electric Cars With 2022 Update

                                                                Electric Cars
Hinkleman's Thoughts...
Step outside the box with me for a minute…
Something I feel strongly about is the necessity for the world to move away from burning petroleum products especially to power cars.
In my opinion... It is important from economic and environmental perspectives to move to electric motor cars as soon as possible. I must add at this point that I am not referring to hybrid vehicles (a.k.a. lobrids). I believe that this is as inevitable as moving from horse drawn buggies to automobiles. “Do you really think it’s possible to build a bunch of them tar covered roads for them automobiles to go on Elmer?”  “Ya, Ma that’s what they’re gonna do!”
I believe that these cars should be powered one of two ways. I still have ambiguous thoughts on which way. The factors that I lack knowledge about are life expectancy of each system, toxicity of production and use of each system and a comparison of the weight of each system (lighter wt. may improve efficiency/ mileage).
Anyway, more specifically, I believe that powering these cars should be accomplished in one of two ways.
1.       Batteries similar to those in electric cars already in production. However, to expect consumers to accept a car with a limited mileage range then wait hours for recharge l find ludicrous!!! So, a standardized battery in size and shape that can be used in all electric cars that can be exchanged in less than 5 minutes seems to me to be a better answer. Building an infrastructure of "refueling stations" with ready charged batteries doesn't even sound like that much of a challenge.
Side note: Tesla is already building a huge battery production facility out west (Arizona or New Mexico), so this plan may already be in the works.

2.       I think that I may like this idea even better. There is a system similar to a battery called a hydrogen fuel cell. When hydrogen is introduced to the "plates" of this cell, electricity is produced. Instead of recharging, as long as a supply of hydrogen is available, the cell keeps producing electricity. So, an infrastructure of hydrogen refueling stations would be required. Although this may sound futuristic, Toyota already is producing a hydrogen fuel cell electric car and refueling stations have already been set up - where? California of course. As a side note, the portability of hydrogen-electric for other uses I find really intriguing.
 Some comparisons of electric cars to internal combustion cars…
 An internal combustion engine has dozens of moving parts. Failure of any of which can decrease or breakdown the motor. This includes 4 to 8 pistons which have to change direction an average of 2000 times per minute while the car is in use. An electric motor has one moving part- the rotor. Instead of moving up then down, the rotor moves in a circle. When the car is sitting still, the electric motor does not have to run.
With only one moving part, an electric motor has potential to have a much longer life expectancy than an internal combustion motor.
 An electric motor is much quieter than an internal combustion motor.
An electric motor has a much wider range of operation (r.p.m.’s) possibly eliminating the need for a transmission.
An electric motor has no need for a reverse gear. Change the polarity of the electricity applied to the motor and it runs backwards.
Computers may soon be our drivers. The interface between electronics and an electric motor is much less complicated as compared to an internal combustion motor.
Already in use- when electricity is applied to an electric motor mechanical energy results. When mechanical energy is applied to an electric motor, it produces electricity- the more electricity it is producing, the more difficult it is to turn. This is the principle behind "regenerative" braking. Instead of energy being lost to unneeded heat as with conventional brakes, the energy recharges a battery. So, stop and go city driving becomes much more efficient.
Do you know what the big diesel engines on trains do? They drive generators which in turn power electric motors which actually move the train.
Do people really want a car that will last a million miles- that is, won’t people get tired of it as it gets wear and tear on the body? One proposal out there is to have bodies that are exchangeable. So, unbolt, unplug, exchange body style, rebolt, replug and you’re off.
With a safety feature of removal of all electricity by turning off the hydrogen, marine applications may be possible.
So, the need for gasoline, transmissions, transmission fluid and oil are all decreased or eliminated- all to the betterment of our environment.
Though at this stage of the game computers are too hackable to be trusted, computers will eventually be driving our cars without hacking vulnerability and with far superior programming than is now available. More importantly, these “smart cars” will be much safer than having that out of control kid from down the street, your drunken neighbor or great grandpa driving in the approaching lane.  
1.       Transporting the kids to soccer practice may be driverless task.
2.       Interstate safety and speeds may greatly increase. Imagine getting into your driverless car that utilizes no external lights at 8:00pm and arriving at your destination 1200+ miles away by 8:00 a.m. You’re rested and ready to vacation.
3.       Traffic cops may be out of a job.
4.       Bank robbers may have to find a different means of escape.

One final point for those who have not read this thoroughly.

HYDROGEN DOES NOT HAVE TO BE BURNED. HYDROGEN BATTERIES ALREADY EXIST. THEY ARE CALLED FUEL CELLS. THEY ARE BASED ON A CHEMICAL REACTION JUST LIKE BATTERIES ARE BUT ARE NOT ELECTRICALLY RECHARGED BUT CHEMICALLY BY THE ADDITION OF MORE HYDROGEN (MUCH LESS TIME THAN RECHARGING A BATTERY).

Thanks for giving me a read.


                                                     Electric Cars Update 2022. 
Talk about not knowing “HOW” to do things... You can tell from my previous post that I am an advocate of electric cars. 
BUT... We don't need to cut our own throats in the process! Going away from a fossil fuel based economy to a green energy based economy is a process. Electric cars just are not able to measure up right now. They are expensive toys for rich people who can afford an “in town” car in addition to their fossil fuel “out of town” car to play with. The “green” infrastructure needed to create enough electrical energy we would need to support our current needs plus electric vehicles by my estimation would have a windmill and solar panels every few blocks! Wouldn't that be aesthetically pleasing to the eyes and ears? 

When will electric cars be a viable option? 
In my opinion this will occur when hydrogen can be produced and stored and long life hydrogen fuel cells (hydrogen batteries) can be produced efficiently in a eco-friendly manner. Hydrogen with hydrogen fuel cells will likely be much lighter than our current batteries and would solve the time consuming charging problem. 
OR... When small nuclear fusion reactors (nuclear reactors without nuclear waste) can produce electricity efficiently and in a eco-friendly manner. This still leaves the long charging time problem.
OR... Something else is discovered. 

BUT THE POINT IS... None of this technology is available yet. 

Bottom Line: Climate change is real and we need to move away from fossil fuel as soon as possible but technology still hasn't gotten to the point where EV's are a feasible replacement for fossil fuel vehicles. For the survival of our country's economy and in order to win the Ukraine War (financially we are in this war!), the U.S. needs to start producing and refining oil again. Its clear to me that we produce and refine oil cleaner than anyone on earth. We don't need to buy from dictators including countries run by “royals”. We need to quit playing politics with our country's future. Our President seems to put his political party above the survival of our country. That's teetering on being a traitor in my opinion. 


Reasons that today's electric cars are not up to snuff (credit Motor Monkey for most of this list)- 
1. Depreciation- Today's electric cars depreciate much faster the fossil fuel vehicles. This should turn around in the future but not yet... 
2. An EV can't be the only car in you household. In current form it can't fulfill all your transportation needs. 
3. EV's are unusable in other markets such as third world countries. 
4. Threatening Existing Economy Models- creating a world economic crisis. To understate the reality of this is like throwing a monkey wrench into a machine and expecting it to fit right in- it can literally cause wars. 
5. High Heavy Load Consumption. If you want to carry a heavy load or tow something, an electric motor consumes significantly more electric power under such a load and that is only if the electric motor in your particular car can carry heavy loads or tow anything. Your 200 to 300 mileage range may be cut in half or less. 
6. Highway driving consumption. The advertised range is not based on highway driving which may decrease range up to 50%. Add that to number 6 and you may be stopping for a recharge every 50 miles or so. This may make your 2 hour trip to the lake with your boat in tow a 4 hour+ trip. 
7. Cold Temperature issues- Simply stated batteries don't function as well in freezing weather. 
8. Too heavy. Today's batteries add much weight to an EV. 
9. Repair difficulties. Not many mechanics are trained on today's EV's. EV's are an electrical threat for anyone not properly trained. 
10. Too expensive for a car that is not full service. 
11. Not So Environmentally-Friendly. Apparently, the process of making a big chunk of Lithium-Ion batteries as well as their disposal is polluting since they aren’t recyclable. 
12. Long Charging Times. 
13. Short Range Anxiety. If you are sure that your charge will only last a maximum of 50 miles, you may wind up stopping every 35-to 40 miles “just to be sure”. And...in the country there are not charging stations even every 50 miles. 
14. Last thing I want to mention is that electricity is not free and EV's consume a lot of electrical power. One owner who only drove locally and charged at home states that his electric bill has increased $300.00 per month. 
15. Buyers still consider them a gimmick due to the drawbacks mentioned here.

NAFTA

NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement)

This is currently law brought about by 1993 legislation that was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. This law did away with tariffs between the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

A few items...
1. Currently, U.S. and Canadian factory workers earn four to six times the wages of Mexican workers (similar in 1993).
2. Carlos Slim was a rich businessman in Mexico in 1993. Today, Carlos Slim is estimated to be the richest man in the world.
3. Proponents would have you believe that technology is responsible for U.S. and Canadian job losses and no doubt it does play a role but technology does not explain this one away.

Time to rethink NAFTA.

                                                                  UPDATE 2
President Trump did renegotiate NAFTA.
YEA!


Climate Change with 2022 Update

Climate Warming

My Thoughts (opinion).

Three Words- It is real.
At the tender young age of sixty-three I could sit this one out.
For two reasons, I won't sit this one out.

The solution...
Five Words- Get rid of fossil fuels.

Now for the reasons.
1. Basic Instinct- Species Preservation. I'd like to know that I have done something to prevent a disaster that can limit or destroy the human race within a few generations.(1) I don't want the generations living now to be remembered as the generations that didn't care. My ability to live a comfortable, free life was built on the  contributions/sacrifices/efforts/willingness to act by women and men in prior generations. In my opinion, we are already late in addressing this problem.
2. Now is the time- I believe we are at a turning point in history. I believe that "Now is the time" to start taking serious steps towards turning away from a fossil fuel economy. I know that this will be a massive socioeconomic change but we've been in this crisis for a while now and just did not realize it. The step from horse and buggies to automobiles was no bigger than the change we need to make now. "Now is the time" for action.

(1) Recently a friend of mine went on a cruise through the Northwest passage. This passage did not exist-ever during human existence until the icecap receded recently.  Okay, Okay... I can hear some of you thinking "well that's a plus!" I can appreciate your slightly sick humor, but I also realize that climate warming is real and anyone capable of reading this and the vast majority of scientific publications on the subject also realize that climate warming is real.

                                                        2022 UPDATE

First, let me state that I stand by what I stated in my blog before this update.
Second, let me state that the "geniuses" instructing the current  Executive Branch of our National Government don't know "how" to do anything ( Huge topic for another blog!)
We do have to address climate change but we do not need to destroy our country in doing so. Therefore, climate change needs to be done as a process. 

Secondly, I'd like to explain  my take "global warming" on an unsophisticated level (my level).
Air pollution is destroying our atmosphere.
Our atmosphere acts as a "green house". 
In the winter it helps hold in warm- it keeps it from getting too cold.
In the summer it filters moderates the heat of the sun rays.(1)
So, a thinning atmosphere, much like a damaged roof of a green house, results in higher temperatures in the summer and colder temperatures in winter.
From looking at current trends, scientists speculate that heat is winning this atmospheric war. So, although there are colder winters and hotter summers, generally, the average temperature is tending up. Hence the term "global warming". (I suspect there is enough data to support this view, but I don't know that for sure.)
Violent weather is caused by cold air masses colliding with hot air masses. That is rain, wind, thunder and lightning. That is basic science.
But, if a thinning atmosphere has caused colder than normal cold air masses (from winter weather) and hotter air masses from normal hot air masses (from summer weather). As weather changes especially in spring and autumn, more larger and more powerful violent weather will be expected to occur. 
I think that is occurring now. 
For me on the coast, I believe we are seeing more and more powerful and larger hurricanes than ever before.
Same for tornadoes inland.

The way to change course is to  move away from fossil fuel. I have faith that there are sufficient centrist Republicans and centrist Democrats who can address climate change with a 5-10 year process to move away from our fossil fuel economy(2). This cannot be done over night without destroying our country's economy which is based heavily on fossil fuel (as is the rest of the world's economies). But this process must start and be kept on track.

Left wing and Right wing extremist must not derail this.(3)
I have faith that there are sufficient centrist Republicans and centrist Democrats who can address climate change with a 5-10 year legislative process to move to away from our fossil fuel economy.
 
(1) Many skin conditions too are resulting from more intense sunrays.
(2) Solar panels and Windmills are not the only answer!
(3) How do we keep Extreme Rightists from destroying it (and our atmosphere in the process)?
How do we keep Extreme Leftists from influencing it to be too strict (and destroying the U.S. economy- and our country in the process)?
That's above my pay grade.






Comment (my opinion) on the man who stated "How do I explain this (Donald Trump) to my daughter?"- Advice for parents.

My Thoughts...
First, explain to your child that no one is perfect (except one if other Christians are reading this).
Second, explain to your child that Hillary, too, has her own faults (i.e. defending a husband who was lying leading to the belittlement of other other women who were telling the truth).
Third, explain to your child that life doesn't always (or even very often) present you with clear cut choices. At times you you must look beyond the accusations and chaos.
Fourth, learn to evaluate for yourself whether the positions candidates espouse on current issues are consistent with their actions.
Fifth, then ask your child to compare the candidates positions on current issues with your child's own positions (Which you as a competent parent help them develop by providing them with facts, history, etc.- trying to leave out your own biases).

If a child can learn how not to be let others control their focus and get beyond the distractions in orders to focus their own attention on things like real issues, then you as a parent are making good progress towards creating a responsible adult.

If you can't do this then personally I believe you'd be better off just telling the child- "Well, you just don't understand Honey"