Perspective: Does Ethanol as an Automotive Fuel Make Sense?

Perspective: Does Ethanol as an Automotive Fuel Make Sense?
The short answer to this is a resounding NO!
The principal reasons given for using ethanol as a fuel in our internal combustion engines
are, namely, the reduction of our dependence on foreign enemy produced oil and the
reduction of harmful emissions, including carbon dioxide. These do not pass the laugh
test. First, 50% of our oil is supplied by Canada and Mexico and the rest is supplied about
equally by friendly Saudi Arabia and the United States. Secondly, no one believes that
the energy generated from ethanol as a fuel exceeds the fossil fuel energy required to
create it, thus it is hard go believe that emissions would be significantly reduced. You can
judge this for yourself by reviewing the steps required to plant, harvest, and process
ethanol.
Ethanol (ethyl alcohol) found in alcoholic based beverages such as wine and rum is
derived from the natural fermentation of the sugars in grapes, sugar beets and sugar cane.
By contrast starch from corn and other grains must first be converted to sugar before it
can be processed to ethanol.
The key steps to manufacture ethanol from corn include:
· Preparing the soil for planting
· Planting and weeding the corn
· Harvesting the crop
· Shipping it to an ethanol refinery.
· Chopping, pulverizing and separating the starch
· Converting the starch to sugar.
· Fermenting the sugar to about 10+% ethanol
· Separating the ethanol/water from the non-fermentable residue
· Distilling the ethanol to a concentration of 96%
· Drying the ethanol\water to achieve ethanol at 99+% required for use in gasoline
· Shipping the ethanol by truck to a gasoline refinery
Each of these steps consumes energy to run the: (1) tractors to till, plant, weed, and
harvest the sugar and starch bearing crops, (2) trucks to ship the crops to the ethanol
refinery, (3)motorized equipment at the ethanol plant to pulverize the materials and pump
them into fermentation tanks, (4) boilers to distill the ethanol, (5) pumps to remove the
ethanol from the drying agents, (6) trucks to haul the ethanol to the gasoline refinery, and
(7) the pumps in the refinery to mix the ethanol with gasoline.
When you combine all these steps, you realize that an awful lot of fossil fuel-derived
energy is required to produce a fuel that is less efficient than gasoline. Therefore, it is
hard to believe that there is a net increase in energy.
Moreover, from a monitory standpoint, corn can only compete with fossil fuel if the
farmer and refiner are subsidized by the taxpayers, you and me. Billions of dollars of
subsidies are paid farmers to grow corn for this use, and the current tax law being
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com
considered in Congress extends those subsidies. By contrast, ethanol manufactured in
Brazil from sugar cane and sugar beets, is less expensive than U.S.corn derived ethanol,
but tariffs our government applies to Brazilian ethanol erase that inherent economic
advantage.
Now, our government wants to increase the ethanol concentration from 10% to 15% in
gasoline. This presents additional problems. Foremost are more expensive stainless steel
tanks and/or Teflon lined fuel lines needed to withstand the steel corrosion problem
indigenous to ethanol. Additionally, because the energy derived from ethanol is about
34% less than gasoline, the engine compression will need to be increased to boost the
octane level of ethanol. This will require a variable turbocharger
If you take into account that the world is running into a shortage of arable land from
which to produce food as well as water to irrigate the crops, why in the world would you
risk real life food and water supplies to deal with the theoretical idea that global warming
is man made?
Now, if we really want to convert our trucks and cars to fuels that would decrease our
dependence on oil, burn cleaner in our engines and produce less carbon dioxide, we
should convert them to liquefied natural gas (LNG).When combusted, natural gas
produces the least amount of carbon dioxide and none of the noxious hydrocarbon and
benzene effluents. Moreover, the United States has huge reserves of shale-derived natural
gas that are being tapped as we write.
We doubt that there would be sufficient savings converting from gasoline to a LPG fuel
system, so it is likely that it would have to be subsidized. Setting asside why we should
change from gasoline at this time in the first place, if we did decide that this is a good
idea, why not subsidize the conversion to natural gas instead of converting to food-stuff
derived ethanol. Conversion to LNG would have the added advantage of creating new
jobs required to produce the gas, compress it for delivery, modify the transportation
vehicles to use it and modify the gas stations to deliver it,
In summary, it’s time to get the government out of this foolhardy venture! The idea of
using food-based material to replace fossil fuel is economically unsound, and subsidizing
the program to boot is absurd considering our burgeoning national debt. More
importantly, it is morally wrong! There is a significant and increasing number of persons
on this planet who are living at starvation levels due to the shrinking supply and
increasing price of food. This is a problem here and now, versus the uncertain and
threoretical impact that man-made global warming may have at some future date.
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

Perspective: The November 2, 2010 Election

Thank God for the Tea Party Movement!! They have put We the People back in charge. The
Media is still in shock and still does not get what happened on Tuesday. Moreover, most of the
members of Congress still do not get it, and based on his press conference after the election, the
President does not get it.
The Constitution begins with this phrase: We the People, in order to form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the
general Welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
In recent years the members of our Congress as well as the President have forgotten that their
boss is us, We the People. And that what We the People want from the Federal Government is a
small number of things which are enumerated in the Constitution.
The current Administration and the Congress have not only forgotten this, but they think that they
know better what We the People need and want. They have enacted laws and programs that we
distinctly told them we did not want. To correct this insubordination, We the People, their boss,
have fired as many of these as we could. And if those that remain do not do what we want,
We the People will fire them in two years.
The Tea Partiers held their first gathering on April 15, 2009. That was the beginning of
We the People organizing a rally to protest the plans being promulgated by the Administration
and the Congress as they began to “Transform America”. When the Stimulus Legislation was
rammed through Congress, loaded as it was with Pork, followed by the House of Representatives
passing “Cap and Trade” legislation in July of 2009 and then followed by the plan to create and
pass what has disparagingly been dubbed, “Obamacare”, the Tea Partiers swarmed the Town Hall
events to voice their objection to these power grabs. Gradually and step by step the Tea Partiers
and their supporters expanded their numbers, their activities and put their money where their
mouth is. This ground swell of resistance kept expanding until it reached a crescendo where voice
and action combined to fire as many of the members of the House and Senate as was possible.
Now, the Tea Party could have become a “Third Party” movement. If so, nothing would have
changed last Tuesday. No, this group decided to place their energy with the Republicans
this time. This is smart! You see, neither the Democrat nor the Republican parties have enough
strength in numbers to win without those who choose whom they want to elect. These folk are
mostly independent, are not tied to either the Republican or the Democrat party, and they have
never organized before. However, their philosophy is conservative as regards the Constitution;
and therefore, they tend to be right of center where the polls say most of us are.
When this group is polled as to what they want, we paraphrase their response as:
· Smaller Government
· Fiscal Responsibility
· Common Defense
· Support for Private Industry Job Creators
Does this list remind you of the list in the Constitution?
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com
Now, the Media and the left will pound on the Republicans whom the Tea Partiers supported to
change the direction that the Obama Administration has been taking us. The big question will be
“what is your plan”? They will denigrate each and every Republican who votes to reverse or
delay many of the actions taken by the previous Congress. They will be called the “Party of NO”,
Obstructionists, Favoring the Rich and so forth.
Here is a way to understand where we are and what we need to do. Imagine you are on a bus that
swerves back and forth on the road and goes faster than you feel is safe. You, as an individual
find out that the driver has never driven a bus before, in fact has never driven any vehicle before.
You try to give him a few pointers, but you are told to sit down and shut up. As the bus lurches
forward placing the riders into ever greater jeopardy, the other riders become vocal and yell to the
driver to stop. Still refusing to pay attention or heed their pleas to change, the riders finally rise up
en-masse, turn off the key and pull the driver out of the seat.
That is where we are. We want the bus stopped! Period! And yes, we do not have a specific plan
to restart the bus. What we want is for it to stay stopped until we can regain our composure and
settle our nerves. If there is “grid lock” we will welcome it and praise it to high heaven.
The Tea Partiers are the key to how we go forward. They represent We the People and they
know what we want. After we develop some new “Bus Drivers” we can then decide where we
want to go. In the meantime, each rider will be free to decide to stop for a while and maybe while
stopped the riders will purchase something or invest in a business.
In other words if new regulations stemming from Obamacare, “Cap and Trade” and the new Bank
Regulations, as well as tax increases and anything associated with “Transforming America” can
be halted, entrepreneurs will overcome their fear of the uncertainty caused by the actions and
plans of this Administration. They will begin to move the cash that has been on the side and
invest it. Jobs will be created as a result. Thus the final point the Tea Partiers have been
promoting will be achieved. Jobs will begin to be created by the private sector of the economy.
What should we as individuals be doing? Support your local Tea Party, stay informed about what
the Administration and Congress, your employees, are doing, and be prepared to fire those who
do not follow the principles enunciated in the Constitution.
Remember We the People wrote the Constitution, and We the People are the boss!
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

Perspective: The Impact of the Kindle on Jobs
The transistor was discovered by researchers at Bell Labs in 1947and marked the
beginning of digital technology. This remarkable and transforming development has led
to such commercial applications as the PC computer, the cell phone, the I-phone, the
CD and DVR, the digital camera and the recent conversion of the rabbit-ear TV, just to
mention a few. In other words most of the modern communication gadgets we have
learned to love. The rate of adoption of this new technology is exponential, and we have
not seen anything yet.
One of the latest applications for digital technology is the Kindle. This is an electronic
book introduced by Amazon on November 19, 2007. They named it Kindle as in kindling
a fire. Figuratively speaking, it has done just that! In a blog I wrote last April I speculated
that one of the books that could be downloaded onto the Kindle at some future date
would be students’ text books. Well, guess what? The town of Clearwater, Florida bought
2200 Kindles for their 2100 high school students for the current school year. All of the
texts to be used have been down loaded into the Kindle. The students can also download
novels, take notes on and highlight portions of the texts. The Kindles can also read the
text aloud.
With such a dramatic and significant development you would think that every news
organization in our Nation would have put the story on the front page. But have you read
or heard about this on the evening news? I doubt it. I heard about it via a tip I got from
Facebook. Then a Google check led me to an article about it in the September 16, 2010
issue of Tampa Bay Online. The Tampa article claims that the Clearwater school wanted
to tap into the students’ love of technology, and that it cost less do download a text than a
traditional book. And, moreover, not only are these devices capable of holding all of a
student’s text books, but each book can be kept up to date on a continuous basis.
Now, skeptics will claim that the kids will lose, destroy or sell the e-book. The article
tells what Clearwater has done to protect against that:
· Students are responsible for lost or stolen Kindles, the same as they are for paper
texts.
· Students can buy insurance to protect against damage of lost Kindles
· The school working with Amazon can track each Kindle and shut it down if it is
stolen, shows up at a Pawn shop or appears on e-bay.
The development and application of the e-book is comparable to the creation of the
Guttenberg printing press, and surely this is the beginning of the end of paper books as
we know them.
Our government and our media are finally beginning to focus on jobs and expect them to
return when the current recession ends, but they are wrong. Digital technology, as applied
to the e-book is eliminating traditional jobs faster than new ones can be created. Consider
the impact on jobs of the application of the e-book to the book publishing industry.
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com
Here is a list of jobs that will be eliminated:
· Harvesting trees for paper
· Gigantic mills that convert the trees first to pulp and then to paper. (These mills
are capable of producing paper at nearly a mile a minute)
· Ink manufacturers
· Printers to apply the ink to the paper
· Book binders to assemble the books
· Book Stores to display and sell the books
We are talking about the loss of thousands and thousands of jobs. And at the pace that
this technology is being commercialized by Amazon, and their competitors, these jobs are
likely to cease before the end of the decade. It is true that there will be some new jobs
such as those who convert the author’s work into digital form suitable for downloading
onto the e-books, and there will still be sellers of downloadable books and there will be
jobs to create and produce e-books that compete with the Kindle. The extreme of this
trend will be the author creating his or her own digital books for downloading onto the ebooks,
thus eliminating even the publisher.
The application of the new digital technology such as employed in the Kindle is as huge
and drastic as to make the industrial revolution of the nineteen century look like a walk in
the park. The last to catch on are our government and the media. These people, who are
predominately educated as journalists and lawyers have little if any knowledge how
capitalism and business work. Consequently, they have no experience such as Kodak
management has had when the digital camera destroyed their silver-based film business,
virtually overnight.
It behooves “we the people” to see that our representatives, who are after all “our
employees”, have practical experience so that they may possibly be able to understand
these new trends and be able to create sensible laws, regulations and educational
programs that are compatible with the free-market energies that are creating the trends.
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

PERSPECTIVE: WHAT IF THE JOBS DON’T COME BACK?

1
PERSPECTIVE: WHAT IF THE JOBS DON’T COME BACK?
By Wayne Pearson
In a blog written in April of this year, I stated that many of the private sector jobs that
have been lost will not come back because of the new technologies in communication,
robotization and the impact of globalization. Every recession provides businesses the
opportunity to implement new tools and technologies that will increase productivity, and
that is exactly what is happening during this recession. Unfortunately, these new
programs usually eliminate jobs, and this time the brunt of this change is being born by
those who are in the fifth decade of their lives. What is so sad is that our Government and
the Main Stream Media seem to have no clue about this pending crisis.
These persons who are in their fifties are not ne’re-do-wells. They were managers,
technicians, excellent knowledge workers or skilled workers in manufacturing, and they
are in their prime. Sadly, however, most of those who are in their fifties are under trained
to compete with the new way their old companies will be operating, and are over trained
for the menial jobs that might be available
Many of these out of work have stopped looking for work! It is a joke to read and hear
constantly that the unemployment rate is just under ten percent, when everyone knows
that it is closer to twenty percent because so many persons have dropped out of the work
force or are working part time. We are told that there are 26 million of these people.
Even if new jobs develop as the economy recovers, it will be more attractive for
businesses to hire younger workers than to re-hire the 50 year-olds. The fact is that the
youth have a far superior grasp of the new communication and robotization technologies.
Many have been using the computer since kindergarten. On the other hand, the fifty year
old is out of date and struggling to grasp the technology let alone master it. Moreover, the
20 year old can be employed at half of the salary and bonuses as the 50 year old.
Coinciding with this trend in new technology and globalization is the fact that the private
business community fears the impact the Obama Administration’s programs will have on
business. Pertinent to the issue being discussed here is the cost of medical insurance and
who has to be covered. In this atmosphere of uncertainty business leaders and their
bankers cannot determine the risk. Consequently, they are reluctant to make any
investment in personnel. In fact, if they had their druthers, they would have as few
permanent employees as possible.
For nearly two years this Administration had done virtually nothing to deal with the
problem of how to re-employ the 50 year-olds. Moreover, for all practical purposes
everything that they have done actually exacerbates the problem. The enactment of
Obamacare and the new Wall Street regulations along with bail outs and out right
takeovers of private enterprise such as we saw with General Motors along with the threat
of ‘cap and trade’ legislation” do nothing to solve this unemployment problem. Then the
Administration dilly dallies with the question of the so-called Bush tax cuts and talks
constantly about “taxing the rich”, which further obfuscates the issue. Increasing the tax
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com
2
on dividends, for example, increases the cost of capital. If you cannot afford to pay for
the capital to expand a facility, you just don’t expand. Is it any wonder the business
community is locked into inaction?
Why our government has acted in such a casual and nonchalant way is not only a mystery
but an absolute outrage. A clue was provided by Obama in a very recent interview with
Brian Williams of NBC. Obama actually stated that he was not concerned about the
problems of today or even those that might affect the election of 2012, but rather he was
concerned about changing the country and the world so that it becomes a wonderful one
for the children and grandchildren. In other words, to hell with the 50 year olds, full
speed ahead for the transformation of America Obama promised during the campaign.
Who among us is smart enough to know how to construct the country 30 or more years
from now so that it is perfect? Only an egotistic narcissistic personality who has the
absolute determination to transform this country into a socialist state would even make a
statement such as that let alone be serious about taking the actions to bring this about.
However, our President and his aides are operating on the premise that they should take
advantage of any crisis to enact their ideological agenda.
This problem is about to become a crisis. Many of these persons have been collecting
unemployment insurance for nearly two years and there is no end in sight. But what
happens when our financially strapped government has to cut off these payments? Do we
think that these persons will just shut up and go away?
Now, I will be the first to say that the solution to the unemployed 50 year old is going to
be hard to find, and maybe harder to implement. But here are a few ideas.
First and foremost, in no case should the person be permitted to continue to collect
unemployment insurance beyond what has normally been permitted in past recessions,
which is about 26 weeks, and no person should be paid for sitting at home doing nothing.
We should give them one of three choices:
· Go back to school to be retrained
· Perform work in community service, for work we need but which is not currently
being funded.
· Become a contract employee.
Back to School: Some of the 50 year-olds could benefit from additional schooling, such
as, for example, becoming a nurse or nurse practitioner. The cost of school should be
supported by low cost loans. They should be paid the same amount as their
unemployment insurance as long as they receive acceptable grades for their school work.
Community Service: Persons performing community service should be paid the same
amount as unemployment insurance even if the work is menial and below the person’s
skills.
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com
3
Contract Employee: The idea of becoming a contract employee should be promoted.
Companies still need the skills of the 50 year olds, but they do not want to be obligated to
cover health insurance, F.I.C.A. payments for Social Security, pension set asides and
want to avoid the hassle from government agencies if the work the contract employee is
performing is no longer needed. Arrangements would be “arms length” which means that
when the contract is completed the relationship ends, period! The Commerce Department
aided by the Department of Education should be able to provide the needed information
as to how to become a self-employed person. The National Association of Self Employed
(NASE) would be a good place to learn how to set up an ‘arms length’ contract.
These concepts are not flushed out in considerable detail, but all would be superior to
having these people sit idly at home doing nothing while feeling frantic over what to do
for themselves and families. Moreover, as they perform useful work, they are more likely
to feel better about themselves.
Before everyone gasps at these ideas, we need to consider what is likely to happen if we
do nothing. Doing nothing means that we have to pay unemployment insurance
indefinitely or decide to cut off unemployment insurance and let the unemployed 50 yearold
to fend for him or her self. The former is a plan for the Country’s going bankrupt. The
latter is a plan for chaos. We need only to look to Greece and the rioting in the streets to
see what likely will happen if we cut them off. We could and probably would have
rioting in our streets here in the United States with all the adverse consequences.
We must do something! But the first step is to have the government get its priorities in
the right order. The first priority is not to worry about and spend time and money to
create a new world 30 years from now, but to act today to fix the critical unemployment
problem.
Let your representatives know that focusing on job creation is their first and only priority,
And tell them that if they don’t get it, “we the people” will see that they, like the out of
work 50 year-olds, will be “fired”!
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

Perspective on the Primary Elections: ARE TERM LIMITS POSSIBLE?

Perspective on the Primary Elections: ARE TERM LIMITS POSSIBLE?
By Wayne Pearson
One of my earlier blogs made the case for firing “for cause” each and everyone of our
535 U.S. Senators and Representatives because we believe that, for the most part, they
are incompetent, arrogant, fiscally irresponsible, corrupt and just plain insubordinate.
Recent polls show that 60% of the public disapproves of the job the Congress is doing
and that they hate both parties. The public is sick and tired of the antics of the individual
members of Congress, again of both parties, and they want to get rid of them.
The results from the primaries across the nation suggest that the public is acting. The
incumbents, regardless of party, are being voted out in these primary elections, and we
can hope that the voter’s wishes, indicated by their selections in the primaries, will be
granted in the November elections.
How the voters are reacting is driving the main stream media bonkers. The polls make
them ever more confused. The media fret about how the new comers will organize and
how they will rule, because the media are so in bed with the incumbents that they cannot
envision any different way of governing. They disparage the Tea Partiers because they do
not fit the traditional mode of politicians. As a result they miss the message the Tea
Partiers are sending: “Government is too big, too intrusive, unbelievably incompentent,
arrogant and corrupt”.
The recent ethics issues involving Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters only support the
voter’s belief. It really does matter to voters that Rangel hasn’t paid taxes because he
misplaced some papers and that Walters helped her husband get a special favors using tax
payer monies! When our elected representatives have been in office for decades as
Rangel and Walters have, they feel they are immune from rules, and should be voted in
again and again for as long as they live. Robert Byrd of West Virginia had to die in office
before he could be removed.
The one sure way to reduce corruption in government is to restrict the amount of time
that an individual can access power. When our representatives feel they are secure and
can remain in their position for a lifetime, they will gain absolute power, and absolute
power corrupts absolutely.
The voters are ready to do something about this absurd situation. That is why they are
voting the way they are. The question is whether they are they asking, indeed demanding
of the new politicians they are electing what is required of them? The voters are clear that
they want private business to be encouraged to create new and lasting jobs, and they want
spending reduced. We suspect that the new electees more or less understand that.
But we believe there should be more. We should demand that the persons we are voting
to replace the incumbents agree to the premise that their offices be TERM LIMITED and
that the persons running for office will pledge to promote and vote for that idea.
Moreover, we should demand that this pledge be CONFIRMED IN WRITING.
Now, this project will require some personal moral fortitude on our part. You see, we
have been coerced by our politicians to become partners in their corruption. Here is how
that works. Your representative comes back home from Washington with a bag full of
money. It very likely was money taken from another more prosperous State than yours,
so it technically does not belong to your State, but you welcome it.
Later when you do not like your representative and want to remove him, you are advised
that “He does so much good for us”. So we keep the creep who becomes more and more
corrupt. Think Robert Byrd and all the buildings in West Virginia that bear his name.
Stop being coerced!! Just say NO! Once you have freed yourself from such corruption,
you will not only feel better, but you will be “free at last” to do the right thing!!
Yes, TERM LIMITS will require a Constitutional Amendment, and it will take a long
time and great dedication. So, we must demand that our new congressional members
sponsor the needed bill. We need to make it unequivocally clear to our new
Representative or Senator that he or she as an individual will face a “term limit”, because
if he or she does not follow our wishes, he or she will be voted out of office the next
round. This will require dedication on our part to see this through. That means continuing
to be active in and support the Tea Partiers and similar groups.
What can each of us do?
· Let your representatives know that you want TERM LIMITS for the Congress and
Senate as soon as possible, and send existing and especially new office holders
this message in every way, verbally when you attend their meetings or send them
messages by Twitter, Facebook, e-mail or snail mail.
· Demand that they be willing to campaign for Term Limits and be willing to back
their pledge in writing.
· Let your fellow citizens, family and neighbors know how strongly you feel about
this issue and gain their support.
· Become involved with your local Tea Party organization.
· Insist that the Tea Partiers make Term Limits a number one priority for their
organizations and groups.
Right now---- while the voters are upset and active--- is a perfect time to promote
TERM LIMITS. This opportunity may not come this way again, so it is imperative that
each of us act and act now.

Perspective on Problem Solving: Gulf Oil Spill
By Wayne Pearson
The massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is said to be the greatest ecological disaster
ever to hit our country, and we knew that was the case from the get go. The question is
why has the response of the US Government been so casual and non-chalant? Much has
been written about problems and how to solve them, and the oil spill could and should be
added as a case for study.
Fundamentally, you cannot solve any problem until you can define it. So what was the
problem?
A deep well in the Gulf exploded sending massive amounts of oil into the Gulf. There was
no known way to stop the flow except to drill another well which would take 90 days.
First, let’s set aside the question of whether we should be drilling for oil in the ocean a
mile deep. Dealing with that would be like being upset over spilled milk. Therefore, that
is a question for another day. We need to deal with the spilled milk (oil) right now.
What Happened?
We learned on April 20, 2010 that British Petroleum’s (BP’s) rig in the Gulf of Mexico
exploded killing 11 employees, injuring 17 others and destroying the rig. At the same
time we learned that oil was escaping from the well at an estimated 50-100 thousand
barrels per day, (roughly to 2-4 million gallons per day). BP immediately announced that
it was drilling another well to by-pass the flow from the damaged well and that it would
take 90 days to complete.
Based on this flow rate and the 90 days needed to plug the well, a grammar school child
could calculate the amount of oil that would be in the Gulf. The answer is 90 days times
2-4 million gallons per day or 180-360 million gallons. One should have said: “WOW!
That is a Hell of a lot of oil!!” Right, it would be enough to cover about 10,000 square
miles of the Gulf: enough to reach the barrier reefs of Louisiana and all of the beaches of
Alabama, Mississippi and Florida. In other words, many times the size of the Exxon
Valdese spill. The damage to businesses in fishing, shrimping, beaches, tourist attractions
and fish, fowl and other marine life could be expected to be gigantic at a cost of billions
of dollars.
In other words this would be a crisis of astronomic proportion; one requiring immediate
and round the clock attention of the top leaders of both the oil company and the US
government.
Immediate Actions Required
· The damaged well would need to be by-passed and/or plugged as soon as is
physically practicable.
· A massive force would need to be organized to collect and/or contain the massive
amount of oil that would flow constantly for 90 days.
Who Should Take Charge?
· Only BP and/or other oil drilling companies have the technology and tools to plug
the leaking well.
· Only the US Government with its vast resources and ability to commandeer and
manage the resources of all the parties, including Corporate, State, and Federal
and Foreign entities and have the power to waive regulations that might hinder
efforts would be capable of taking charge of the massive organization needed to
contain the spill and conduct the cleanup.
WHAT HAS BEEN THE RESPONSE?
By BP:
· They began drilling second and third wells aimed at plugging the initial well.
· They have been working 24/7 to employ every technique known to plug the leak
· They have been doing what they can to contain the spill from the leak.
· They are gathering evidence to determine what caused the problem
· They have agreed to pay all reasonable expenses for the damage to beaches, wild
life and businesses.
By the US Government:
· The Administration initially refused to take any responsibility for the oil spill, the
analysis of it or for actions required to deal with the consequences of the spill
· It placed a moratorium on all drilling in the Gulf for six months.
· It had the Attorney General tell BP that they had performed criminally regarding
the alleged lack of safe guards, and that the government would bring criminal and
probably civil suits.
· The President badgered BP into agreeing to a fund of $20 billion to pay for all
costs, including pay for the unemployed caused by the drilling moratorium
· Henry Waxman convened his committee to interrogate the CEO of BP, each
member individually asking such “do you still beat your wife” questions such as:
“Were the short cuts you took designed to save time or money?”
Some 40 days after the leak the Administration began to grasp the fact that the
magnitude of the problem exceeded the physical resources of BP. Then it acted only
half heartedly in the development of and implementation of a plan to deal with the
effects of the spill.
· They let the bureaucrats in the EPA block the efforts of the Gulf governors to
build berms and take other such actions to prevent the oil from reaching the
critical beach and river areas.
· They allowed the 1920 Jones Act to block foreign skimmer ships from coming
to the Gulf to help.
BP may be responsible for not employing all the safety features that would have been
prudent to minimize the prospect of such an explosion. This is not clear at this early
point, especially since the US Government’s Mineral Management Administration
(MMA) gave clearance to BP’s protocol just weeks before the explosion. Of course the
Administration fired the woman in charge of this MMA activity as soon as the problem
arose.
Needless to say, spending any major effort to get answers to these questions at this time
cannot be a major priority while one is trying to stop the leak and organize the necessary
cleanup. Moreover, the last thing you want to do is distract the managers who are
working 24/7 to figure out how to solve the problem. The investigation and how to
prevent future incidents can and should be left for another day. Any prudent and
competent manager knows this instinctively.
So, what explains the actions or lack of by the President and his Administration? Let’s
hypothesize:
· They are ideologically driven and want to take advantage of such a catastrophic
event to initiate another program to transform America.
· They have no practical experience in how to do things, and thus are technically
incompetent.
· They are both ideologically driven and incompetent.
What are the Clues?
Ideologically Driven
Their first actions give us the direction of their thinking. They immediately blamed BP
and the Bush administration for the cause of the explosion. Then they promptly placed a
six month ban on off-shore drilling. This was followed by the President’s Oval Office
talk about the need for an energy bill that included “cap and trade”. Their argument for
the ban was that we must cut our dependence on foreign oil.
This does not pass the laugh test. How does reducing the production of oil from United
States owned resources cut our dependence on oil from foreign suppliers? Moreover, has
anyone noticed what our sources of foreign oil are? Surprise surprise, 85 % of our
imported crude oil is provided by counties that have to be considered as friendly to us.
This especially includes our first two primary sources, Canada and Mexico respectively,
who together, provide 35% of our imported oil.
The fact that the Administration made no effort to waive regulations on environmental
issues or the Jones Act, which was intended to protect US maritime union jobs, tells us a
lot about their penchant to think and act ideologically.
Incompetence:
They have manifested their incompetence. There were many needed actions that did not
require an ideological framework to determine what to do. For example, they could have
immediately taken charge of what was needed to control the oil spill and arrange for the
clean up. This would have required them to organize an armada of ships, equipment and
personnel from all over the US and the world. Instead they dilly dallied for over forty
days, while their only actions were to vilify BP and harass the management of BP with
the threat of law suits and congressional investigations. At a time when BP management
needed to focus on the problem of stopping the leak and containing the released oil, these
government led distractions were irresponsible if not criminal in themselves.
Both Ideological and Incompetent
Based on the above discussion, it must be clear to anyone that they are driven by
ideological desires to transform America to order to spread the wealth. At the very same
time, they are staffed by ideologues that have little if any experience in doing practical
things. If you have no experience that is pertinent and required to deal with the problem
at hand, that is the definition of incompetence. The fact that the person or persons have
fabulous educations and diplomas of all types do not make them capable of handling the
job they have been assigned.
We the People are the bosses of these ideologues and incompetents. We the people can
decide whether we have to put up with their insubordination as regards to not doing our
bidding and their demonstrated incompetence. We the people have been polled, and our
wishes are perfectly clear:
· As a top priority we want this Administration to encourage private enterprise to
create jobs.
· We do not want a 2000+ page health care bill that cannot be understood by
anyone.
· We do not want a 2000+ page bank regulation bill that also cannot be understood
by anyone.
· We do not want our deep indigenous supplies of coal and natural gas to be
replaced by deminimus supplies of expensive solar and wind.
The world is becoming an increasingly complex place and problems of the magnitude of
the Gulf oil spill require the highest level of experienced competent managers. So, what
Action Should We the People Take?
FIRE THE ENTIRE BUNCH. Begin this November by replacing the incompetent
ideologues in Congress. Then FIRE THE BOSS in 2012.

1
PERSPECTIVE ON “MORAL COMMPASSES”:
The need for and how to implant them in children. By Wayne Pearson
In my previous Blog we theorized that the reason the Wall Street investment bankers
seemed to go astray regarding the sale of derivatives and credit default swaps was the
lack of moral compasses in those who created and promulgated the dubious value
financial devices. We further reasoned that the problem might have roots going back
forty years when we began to dismantle the structure that had been in place for centuries
to build these moral compasses in children. We concluded by claiming that “We threw
the baby out with the bath water”. This Blog explores what can be done, if anything, to
rescue the “baby”.
We start by reiterating the four pillars of the structure that formed the mechanism for
implanting a moral compass in a child.
· The parent accepted the responsibility for leading the process
· The neighbors thought they were partners and participated
· The schools felt an obligation to be partners and were involved
· The Churches added an historical and spiritual foundation.
Our analysis of what changed included these factors:
· Out litigious society’s penchant for suing everyone for everything
· The family break-up.
· A misunderstanding of how self-esteem is created
· The efforts by the A.C.L.U. to get the principles promulgated by the Churches out
of our schools
Litigious Society:
We won’t even consider trying to do anything about our litigious society.
Family Breakup:
We probably cannot make much of a change, if any, in the break-up of families. It is too
easy for partners to divorce because of the no-fault factor.
Parenting:
With both parents in the work force and the family based on two incomes, the role of the
parent is confused and compromised. Society has condoned the idea that the parent, not
having time to be the manager, can become the friend or pal of the child. This has led to
the absurd idea that we have to be careful about how to treat the child for fear of
destroying the child’s self-esteem. In this circumstance, something will have to give. That
something is likely to be the task of building a moral compass in the child.
This concept must be eradicated. Self-esteem cannot be bestowed; it must be earned.
Moreover, only an adult can build a conscience into a child because there is nothing in
natural law that would lead the child on its own to understand what a conscience is let
alone how to build one.
2
In short, the parent must be placed back in charge of creating the moral compass. And
society needs to provide help for this parent. There are some new writings that provide
this support. One of the best is a book by E.D. Hill entitled: “I’m Not Your Friend, I’m
Your Parent: Helping Your Children Set the Boundaries they Need….and Really Want”.
This book is chock full of great advice and useful tactics for how to raise a child so that
there is an intact and functional conscience by the time the child is 18 years old. The subtitle
of the book, namely, helping the child to find the boundaries that they need and want
is worth the price of the book. Hill and her husband have 8 children ranging from babes
to late teen agers. She includes examples of what can be done to get the attention of and
how to help each of the children regardless of age.
Schools:
This will surprise you, but I think that we should stop fighting the A.C.L.U in their quest
to remove all semblances and artifacts of the church from our schools. Battling the
A.C.L.U. on this issue is futile because the A.CL.U. will probably win the argument
anyway due to the separation of church and state. In addition, the legal expenses would
be enormous.
Assume that the A.C.L.U wants to remove the Ten Commandments. We could say, OK
we will take the first four of the commandments that have to do with how we are to relate
to God out of the school. Actually, they have no direct tie to ethics save for frightening
one who believes that God is looking over ones shoulder. But what about the next six
which include: don’t lie, don’t steal, don’t murder, and don’t covet other’s property, don’t
commit adultery and honoring ones parents? Well, maybe the A.C.L.U. would want to
drop coveting others property, not committing adultery and honoring ones parents.
Surely, the individual members of A.C.L.U. would not want their children to steal and
murder and lie!
The obvious next question is: If the Ten Commandments are tied too closely to religious
concepts and rules, what list of secular rules should we use? The number and type of such
rules will undoubtedly be highly controversial, but the discussion about this subject will
be most useful to both the child and the adult. Let’s begin by listing at least some of the
possible rules.
· As a general tenant, follow the Golden Rule:
“Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You”
Do not harass, bully or physically harm other persons
· Do not lie, be honest at all times.
· Do not steal anything tangible or intangible
· Do not commit murder
· Adhere to your commitments and vows; let your word be your bond
Students using such a list could be tested periodically to determine if their Conscience is
progressing to where the student can tell what is right from what is wrong. The student
should be encouraged to and taught how to seek advice from those who seem to know the
3
difference between right and wrong. The teaching should include actual examples such
as “Is it OK to take an employer’s pencil home because it has so little value?” The
teaching should progress so that the application of the moral compass becomes rote, so its
use becomes unconscious. For those reading this blog and who don’t know the answer to
the pencil question, the answer is unequivocally NO!
So, how would the A.C.L.U. teach the child to know right from wrong? Would it want
the child to learn by noting that a friend, relative or parent was in jail and thus, deduce
that what the imprisoned person did was a bad thing? In the first place it would be a little
late to learn that lesson, not to say how ridiculous that method of teaching would be. No,
the teaching of ethics must be a fundamental part of the equation of how to build a
conscience in a human being. Since the child is in school for 6 hours a day, five days a
week, about 40 weeks per year for about 15 years or about 18,000 hours why is the
school not the place to focus on the teaching of ethics to construct functioning moral
compasses in our children?
Neighbors:
Historically the neighbor was willing and even felt an obligation to be a partner with the
parent in the raising of children, and it was understood to be a two-way street, a mutual
understanding. With the expansion of college graduates going into law and the need
therefore for them to create a need for their services, it was only natural that there would
be law suits for anything that you could think of. Soon, the neighbor fearing a suit for
correcting a neighbors child, decided to ignore the child’s bad or dangerous behavior.
There is a way to correct this. If the parent realizes that he or she needs the help of the
neighbor, that wise parent will approach the neighbor to seek the neighbors help. The
way around the legal question is to propose a “hold harmless” agreement. With this the
parent can spell out what he or she wished the neighbor to do if the parent’s child is seen
or caught in the act of performing some activity that runs counter to the parent’s plan to
build a conscience into the child. The agreement would entail that the neighbor be
empowered to stop the action that is wrong, bring the child to the parent and tell the
parent what happened. The agreement would also entail the parent’s thanking the
neighbor in the presence of the child for terminating the wrong activity and bringing the
child to the parent. Hopefully, this arrangement could be on a “my word is my bond”
basis, but maybe it should be in writing in a friendly, non-legal basis.
Now that we have some ideas about what we can do and what we probably cannot do
about rescuing the baby, here is what we recommend that the parent, the leader of this
task, do.
ACTIONS FOR PARENTS OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN:
For Yourselves
Understand that you are primarily responsible for seeing that your child has a functioning
conscience, a functioning Moral Compass, by the time the child is 18 years of age. Know
also, that this job starts very shortly after the child is placed in your arms. Burn into your
4
brain that you as the parent are the leader of the team that you will employ to help with
this vital task, and that you are the parent not the colleague of your child.
Remind yourself that as E.D.Hill’s book subtitle states you are “Helping Your Children
Set the Boundaries they Need….and Really Want”. Acquire, read and use E.D.Hill’s
book as a reference and guide. There are doubtless other comparable books, and if found
they should be employed.
With Your Neighbor:
Form a relationship with your neighbor or neighbors that permits their being your partner,
so that the neighbor feels comfortable to assist you when you and your child need it.
With Your School:
Become involved with the teachers and the school administration to form a partnership
with them comparable to the one described for the neighbor, so that the personnel in the
school will feel free to keep you informed about the ethical progress of your child. This is
not the same as grades for deportment or conduct which may be on the report card. You
want the teacher or administrator to know that you will hold them harmless if they tell
you the truth.
Help the school to develop a list of rules of ethics that you would like taught to your
child. This may and probably will require you to become active in the PTA and to meet
and know some of the School Board members. Use these meetings to mutually develop
the list and the words to employ in the rules of ethics that you want the school to adopt.
With Your Church:
The Church can and should be employed as a partner in this endeavor if it at all possible.
If the child understands that you have decided to be the leader of the group that is
working to help the child find the boundaries that they need and seek, then their
resistance to attending Sunday School may be lessened and will make your job of
installing a moral compass in the child easier. There is no doubt that the lessons taught in
Sunday School will enhance and strengthen your program. And it probably helps for the
child to believe that God is watching.
In conclusion, it is true that “rescuing the baby” may seem insurmountable on a national
basis. But there are some principles that are applicable. Many of you readers who are
parents are already applying these principles, but as a society we are not. Yet, there are
actions each of us can take to promulgate these fundamental principles. If each individual
will work in his or her immediate circle of friends and/or family, a haven can be created
that will foster the creation of moral compasses in your individual child or grandchild.
Then, perhaps like tossing a stone in the proverbial pond, circles of understanding may
spread out until the entire society is reverberating with the waves from that tiny stone.

PERSPECTIVE ON DERIVATIVES BY WAYNE PEARSON

Perspective on Derivatives
What Went Wrong and Why
By Wayne Pearson
We have all heard about the problems our economy is experiencing as a result of the
financial collapse of such Wall Street investment bankers as Bear Stearns, Lehman
Brothers and the various and sundry mergers to save such financial firms as Morgan
Stanley. Many of us have had personal experiences with the results of the problem
including a precipitous fall in the value of assets such as retirement savings, funds set
aside for college and the value of homes. This financial debacle has caused the US
government to infuse billions of dollars of monies into the financial institutions to keep
them afloat. These so-called “bail out” funds came from the US Treasury, or in other
words, from the taxpayers, namely you.
The question we have is why did this happen? Let’s begin our investigation by trying to
understand just what it was and still is that these financial institutions are engaged in that
caused the problem.
We all know regular banks; the kind that we grew up with and placed our allowances or
earned money into as kids. We later learned about the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, F.D.I.C. which protected our savings in the event of the failure of the bank.
The F.D.I.C. was put in place in the 1930’s after the massive run on the banks during the
recession. My own parents lost all of their savings as a result of that bank crash. Today
these traditional banks are highly regulated to minimize the possibility of failure, and in
the event of such as catastrophic event, your and my savings are protected.
Starting in the 1990s, other financial institutions were permitted to enter the banking
business. These firms had plenty of excess cash from their main activities and could now
use that cash for financial activities outside the primary mission of their enterprise. These
firms included insurance companies, and investment bankers. Most of the investment
banker’s headquarters are on Wall Street in New York City. We can more or less
understand what insurance companies do, but what does a Wall Street investment banker
do? Mostly, they deal in “financial derivatives”. So, this raises the question:” What is a
“financial derivative”? Let’s start with Webster’s dictionary definition:
“Derivatives is the collective name used for a broad class of financial instruments that
derive their value from other financial instruments events or conditions”
OK, so a derivative is a financial instrument derived from an underlying asset such as
stocks, currency, mortgages, etc. Derivatives allow holders to speculate on price
movements of the underlying asset without actually owning the asset concerned.
2
Derivatives are traded for two main reasons:
1. To allow holders to hedge a position, that is to reduce the risk inherent in their
basic position;
2. To allow speculators to profit from correctly anticipating movements in price
either up or down...
Investment bankers’ profits derive from the premiums paid by the hedgers for reducing
their risks. And you can bet on anything from a financial asset to no asset at all. There is
no type of debt that cannot be sold. Examples include student loans, home equity loans,
credit card balances, auto notes, buying up and life and/or health insurance policies and
as we have seen, home mortgages. The carbon credits from cap and trade will be ideal
new derivatives. Moreover, all of these derivatives can be bundled which makes it more
difficult to ascertain the true value of these financial instruments.
The current sub-prime mortgage is a classic example. First, the lendee provided little or
no down payment and secondly, there was little or no evidence that the lendee could
repay the loan. The banks then sold these mortgages to the investment banks who
bundled them, sometimes 4000 or more in a bundle, and sold them to whomever wanted
to trade in these risky assets.
If this sounds a little like a Las Vegas casino to you where you place bets, you are
thinking correctly.
With the Internet and the worldwide web that reaches everyone on the planet who has
access to it, these financial instrument bundlers can deal with anyone in the world who
wishs to gamble on whatever bet these characters are promoting. The new information
technology coupled with the fact that all transactions can be global today, complicates
this issue by several orders of magnatude. Moreover, these companies do not have to
operate from Wall Street in New York City. They can locate anywhere on the planet that
they please.
Now that you have some idea of the length and breadth of the possiblilities, it should
occur to you that it would be extremely difficult for our or any government to regulate
this activity short of shutting it down altogether. This might require a Constitutional
amendment like the eighteenth amendment which attempted to prohibit alcohol
consumption. We know how well that worked. We learned the hard way that that
approach drove the use underground with the concomitant rise in the Mafia.
What should be done? And can it be done? These are the key questions.
The Senate just passed a bill intended to massively overhaul the banking and related
investment industries. In essence the bill:
· Calls for new ways to watch for risks in the financial system
· Makes it esier to liquidate large failing financial firms
· Writes new rules for complex securities,i.e., derivatives
· Creates a new consumer protection agency
3
If passed and signed into law, this doubtless goes too far, especially the new consumer
procection agency which could regulate industries far beyond the financial ones. The
only law that is needed is one that separates the regular banking industry that is regulated
by the F.D.I C. from the Wall Street financial institutions that deal in deratives. It is a
joke to think that the Federal Governement can effectively regulate investment
organizations who create and package hard-to-define securities and sell them off to
unknowedgable and unsuspecting purchasers.
What is needed is a mechanism to build a moral compass in the minds of the workers
in these institutions. That compass is commonly and historically known as a
conscience. This cannot be regulated by law!
In the Senate’s investigation of the Wall Street investment bankers, it is interesting that
Senator Carl Levin quizzed the Goldman Saks management with the phrase: “Didn’t
you know these were shitty” deals.” Then he used that adjective 12 times. From the look
on the faces of the CEOs of the investment bankers, one could deduce that they wondered
where he had been. Had he never heard of Hedge Funds?
Carl is about 73 years old and has been in the Senate for 32 years. He is a graduate of
Harvand Law School and has never worked in private enterprise save for a short stint in
private law practice. So, where was Carl during the past 32 years? Hadn’t he noticed that
growing number of young persons who seen not to know the difference between right and
wrong? In fact, as a liberal, I suspect he contributed to the demise of the system that used
to be in place to install moral compasses in our children, and I suspect that he contributed
to what has made our society so litigious.
The thirty something persons at these financial institutions who are creatively
formulating these “bets” are the product of the abandoment of the principles and
institutions that used to build consiences in children so that when they became adults they
would know the difference between what was a “shitty” deal and what was not. In those
halcion days of long ago a hand shake would suffice to seal a deal because a man’s word
was his bond. The deals were transparent and rarely “shitty”.
Well, then, what is a conscience? A definition that applys here is that it means “a person
who has a conscience is aware of wrong doing” .Nearly everyone has had experience
with newly born animals and realizes that they need to be trained to behave in the mannor
that society deems acceptable. We house train our pets and teach horses to do incredible
tricks, but we know that left alone without teaching or training the pet will be no
different than a wild animal. The human animal is no different, because it is an animal.
However, the difference between a human animal and other animals is that the human’s
brain can be taught the difference between right and wrong, where right or wrong
conform to some standard that society has established. But it must be taught!
The old adage, “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks” is very applicable here. Recently
we have been told that our most prestigious business schools such as Wharton and
Harvard, have decided to add an “ethics” course into their curriculum.
4
This would be laughable if this issue were’t so serious. We have news for these schools:
this is too late by twenty years! The teaching must begin as early as possible, and the
teaching must be constant and continuous until the conscience is fully imbedded and truly
functional on its own. Moreover, this task must be completed by the time the child is
eighteen years of age. This is hard work for the parent and for society, but it must be
undertaken and with dedication.
Forty years ago our society had four pillars to support a parent in their task of turning a
human from birth into a reliable and honest citizen who would be an asset to society.
These four pillars were:
1. The parent who knew and accepted responsibility for leading the task of inserting
a “moral compass” in its offspring.
2. The neighbor who felt comfortable and even responsible for assisting the parent in
the task.
3. The school system who knew and accepted their responsibility to assist the
parent.
4. The Sunday School who knew and accepted their responsibility for integrating the
child into the community of persons who, following the teaching of Christ would
“Love their neighbor as they would love themselves”
For the most part, it is all gone. What happened in these past forty years to cause us to
decide it was not necessary to build moral compasses, e.g. consciences, in our children?
How did this happen in a mere 40 years when it was so solidly integrated for centuries?
Was it Spock and the consept of building Self-Esteem? Was it the ACLU? Was it the
ease of Family Break-up via no-fault divorce? Was it the number of illegitamite children
who were being raised without the presence of both parents, with usually the father in
absence? Was it the huge and growing numbers of lawyers we graduated without visible
means of income, so that they had to make jobs by creating our Litigious Society?
Actully, it was all of those things!!
Self Esteem:The worst idea of all was the concept of how one achieves self-esteem. In
the old days, one earned self-esteem. Today, it is assigned. All children must suceed, and
they must be coddled and protected to assure that their self-esteem is not harmed. It has
gone so far that the modern parent believes he or she needs to be the pal of the child , a
buddy so to speak. How many of us who grew up with the old ways have heard our
children admonish us for trying to get a grandchild to stop misbehaving and being told
by our child, now the parent, to quit that because we would destroy the grandchild’s self
esteem? After all, if grandparent’s generation doesn’t know how to program a VCR,
what would it know about raising children? Whatever happened to the motto that a child
should be “seen and not heard.” Today, a child’s behavior in public is most likely to be
“obsceen and absurd”.
The ACLU: This organization methodically tries, and with much success, to get the
principles promulgated by the church out of our schools. The Bible is no longer read,
5
there are no prayers said before classes, and there are no Bacculariat services at
graduation.
Family Break-up: The research is in. A child will be better educated, will be more
wealthy, more healthy and live longer and be happier when raised with both the father
and mother present in their lives. The marriage vows no longer mean anything, legally or
other wise. As a result the number of single parents is increasing. This makes it easier for
the child to manipulate the single parent into doing what the child wants. All any child
wants is to test the boundries and keep pushing them as far as possible. The research
shows that the child is happier and behaves better when it is certain where the boundries
are and they remain firmly in place.
Litigious Society: When one can be sued for the slightest real or imagined infraction,
one becames very cautious about entering into any activity or behavior which might bring
on a law suite. Whether one wins or loses a law suite, the cost can become so high that it
prohibits the pursuit of the case. Consider the school Principal who is confronted with
having a Christmas Tree or anything smacking of Christmas celebration in or on his
school property. The ACLU is very likely to sue. Consequently, the School Board will
have to come up with the funds to fight the case or pay off the complainer; and the
Principal will be blamed and perhaps punished for not foreseeing this event. School
Principals are not stupid. The pragmatic course for any Principal is to avoid having any
symbal of Christmas within miles of his juristiction. So, he or she prohibits it.
Likewise the neighbor who might have grabbed your child and removed him or her from
a dangerous situation is unlikely to do so for fear of being chewed out at the least and
sued at the most. In the old days , the parent would thank the neighbor for saving and
even repromanding the child. Subsequent to that, the parent would speak firmly to the
child and that would be that!
Ethics:
It used to be that nearly everyone went to church on Sunday, and the children went to
Sunday school. There the students were taught the story of Jesus and the many lessons he
taught via parables. They learned the Ten Commandments, four of which dealt with how
one should relate to God; the other six dealt with how one should relate to another human
being. The second six are secular and deal with ethics. Next to the parent, the church was
the main place where ethics were taught in an organized fashion. The schools supported
this by permitting readings from the Bible each day and by their rules for exacting
discipline. “Ethics” could be taught in an atheist society, but with the panic about
separation of church and state, these six commandments are treated as religion not ethics
or rules to live by. Consequently, they are forbidden to be mentioned in schools.
The question here is why are the children not going to church? Well, if one watched the
modern parent with these children during the past 30 or so years, we noted these
situations:
6
· As soon as the child could sit up, it was placed on a high chair in front of the TV
and given food which it ate alone.
· As soon as the child could sit at the table, if it refused the fare that the mother had
prepared, the mother would get up from the table and prepare what the little
darling wanted, while everyone else either waited for the mother to return to the
table or else went on to finish their meals, while the conversation focused on what
that child wanted.
Now, if or when a parent stated that the plan was to go to Sunday school, guess what the
child’s reaction was? Right, he or she stated emphatically that they did not want to go,
and they did not go, because it was already established that the child would have the say
about what he or she wanted. Therefore, the child did not and does not go to church.
If one believes in the old-time farming principle that “what you sow you will reap” which
is also in the Bible, “so you sow, so you reap”, why are we surprised that the thirty
something Wall Street kids who have created the derivatives don’t know the difference
between a truthful, honest transparent deal versus one, to use the Senator from Michigan,
Carl Levin’s term, “shitty”?
In conclusion, we have thrown the baby out with the bath water, and the derivatives
scandal is the product we are reaping. Our next Blog will attempt to outline what our
society can do to rescue the baby!

PROSPECTIVE: THE CRISIS IN JOB CREATION BY WAYNE PEARSON

THE CRISIS IN JOB CREATION
AND
WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT
The first major economic downturn in decades has hit at a time when we are experiencing
a paradigm shift in the way business is conducted and will be conducted from now on.
Many of the private sector jobs that have been lost will not be replaced because of the
new technologies in communication, robotization and the impact of globalization. It is
very sad that this President and the incompetent gang of 535 in Congress have wasted the
past 18 months not focusing like a laser on this gigantic problem. Instead they have spent
countless hours working on the health and energy programs, both of which the people
have emphatically told them that we do not want at this time. The polls are perfectly clear
that we want them to focus on Jobs, Jobs, Jobs. Moreover, we believe that the high cost
of the healthcare and the energy plans will exacerbate the jobs crisis.
During the past 18 months we have seen jobs disappear so that unemployment has
reached about 10%, and it’s more like 17% when the underemployed are taken into
account. What we are not being told is that many of these jobs are lost forever.
Meantime, the so called stimulus program has saved or created government jobs
primarily at the State and Federal level, thus increasing the size of government at the
expense of private jobs.
Here are some actions the Administration has taken that virtually assure the stagnation of
private investment.
· Took control of General Motors essentially to protect the union jobs that, in large
part, have caused the non-competitiveness of GM and the American automobile
industry in general.
· Enacted health care legislation which will put government in control of about
17% of the US economy, expanding the bureaucracy and government intervention
into private business, including having the IRS fine those who do not comply with
the new requirements and regulations embedded in this massive law.
· Introduced legislation to control green house gas emissions having the
consequence of substantially increasing the price of energy for businesses and
private citizens
· Promised to enact higher taxes on businesses and individuals making above
$250k
· Promoted the card check plan which raises the fear that businesses could and
probably would become unionized.
· Instituted government regulation of all parts of the business including having a
Pay Czar determine what salaries and bonuses can be paid.
· Slammed bankers especially those who accepted the “bail out” funds for making
too much money despite the fact that most of the bail out funds have been repaid
with interest.
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com
2
Small business owners, the ones that generate the new jobs, can not get the loans that
they need. Many banks are in a position to make loans, but they want to be assured that
the risk is acceptable so that they can expect to recover their loan plus interest in a timely
manner. Moreover, the bankers are more cautious than ever with the government
regulators looking over their shoulders. Since the private sector entrepreneur cannot
provide the bankers the guarantees they feel they require, the loan does not happen, and
the businessman does not undertake the venture. What we have is stagnation in the
private sector of the economy the only segment that produces money making jobs that
provide the taxes to make government viable.
Business can only survive and thrive in a climate of faith where the rules are set and will
remain set. No one will invest in an expansion of a business or invest in a new business
where the present rules are not only deliberately being changed, but the new ones are
mostly in the negative direction as regards increasing the risk of an entrepreneurial
venture. Uncertainty of tax structures and the degree of new government regulation of
business is anathema to the investor. Worse still is the fact that investment overseas is
more attractive, often less risky with lower taxes than that in the United States. The
investor will sit on his capital until things straighten out. Has anyone noticed the interest
in gold?
Many citizens believe that the stalemated condition of our economy is a deliberate plan of
the current President and his colleagues. The President campaigned and is governing
under the flag of “Transforming America”, and we recall his discussion with Joe the
Plumber about “Spreading the Wealth”. Many believe that the Administration’s plan is to
spread the wealth by taxing the wealthy with the principal focus on private industry. It is
believed that the Administration does not care that this will bankrupt the country, and
will destroy the very base that has made the United States so successful and the envy of
the world. Still others believe that the members of the Administration are so
inexperienced that they are inept (Obama’s administration has less than 8% of its
members who have private enterprise experience). Yet, there are some who feel that the
Administration is on the right track and is just trying to correct some of the inequalities in
our system such as providing health insurance to about 30 million citizens who do not
have it now, and preventing man-made global warming
Regardless of what the Administration’s motive is, we are going in the wrong direction!
We must get back to supporting the capitalistic system that has given us the best life style
of any country on the planet.
Getting us on the right track will take all the skill and focus we can muster, because the
world is going to be significantly different than the world prior to the recession. Let’s
examine a few factors.
· Communication Technology:
The rapid change in communication technologies is staggering. When I was a
teenager in the forties we had a total of eight means of communication. These
included one dial up land line phone, one radio, one newspaper, snail mail, access
to movies, books, magazines, and there was an encyclopedia in the school.
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com
3
Today’s teenager has about 27 means of communication. Many such as I-Pod, IPad,
texting by cell phone, Facebook and Twitter only came into being within the
past few years. This new technology is being adopted worldwide at an astonishing
rate.
· Robotization:
For decades we have been replacing humans with robots, and this will continue to
accelerate in this new world due to the ever improving microchip. Every day a
human being is replaced by a robot. Even such everyday things as when you call a
business or agency and get a recorded set of messages to tell you to push one for
this, two for that, and so forth. That device is a robot.
· Globalization:
World wide competition for the businesses and services our country supplies is
huge and accelerating. This may shock you, but during the past 30 years, while
our grandchildren have been growing to adulthood, the middle class has doubled
on our planet. Globalization, keyed to the aforementioned communication
technology, is the principal reason for this change. It is the unprecedented rate of
change that is so remarkable. In China people are moving from the farming
regions to cities to enter manufacturing businesses in droves. Shenzhen, China,
for example, did not exist thirty years ago. Today, it is a huge and growing city of
nine million residents. By the way, the favorite car of the middle class Chinese is
the Buick. Sort of reminds you of America in the 1950’s. In addition to China, we
have India, South Korea and Brazil, to name just a few countries that are rapidly
contributing to the growing middle class.
Impact on Jobs:
When my generation and my children’s generation entered the workforce, we could
largely count on being employed by the same firm, and often at the same location, for our
entire career. For our grandchildren entering the workforce today, that is a very unlikely
scenario. It is highly probable that the job one starts with will not even be in existence at
one’s retirement. In his book entitled, “Sonic Boom: Globalization at Mach Speed”,
George Easterbrook says that while globalization causes all goods and services to be in
ample supply, global competition will make jobs less secure. Workers will be constantly
looking for their next job. Economists call this “Job Churn”, the unending turnover of
new hires and displaced workers. Eastman claims that while this is good for the economy,
it leaves everybody stressed out, and that even those with good jobs feel insecure.
Then there is the rapid commercialization of new digital technology. Have you heard of
Kindle and most recently the I-Pad? These are digital electronic devices created by
Amazon and Apple, respectively that permit one to download a book from the Internet.
You can read the material just as one would read a paper book. A logical application of
this technology will be to replace the textbook. Not only are these devices capable of
holding all of a student’s text books, but each book can be kept up to date on a
continuous basis.
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com
4
Imagine the impact the application of this new technology will have on jobs. If schools
adopt this technology to replace tradiditional text books with this 1.5 pound device, the
kids will not need knapsacks, so knapsack maker jobs will be lost. There will be no need
for a paper textbook; so book binders, ink producers, paper makers, pulp producers and
tree harvesters will not be required. We are talking of thousands of jobs from one simple
and economic application of this new digital technology. We are experiencing a change
in the way business is conducted that dwarfs the industrial revolution of a century ago
To provide some incentive for each of us to get up off our couches and act, let’s consider
the impact the Administration’s failure to promote and motivate the formation and
utilization of private ventures is having on our young folk, the grandchildren of my
generation, if you will. These young adults are at the peak of their skill level in terms of
their education. But there are no jobs, and it is not clear where the jobs will be for their
specific skills. Communication technology-wise these young folk are better equipped
than any generation before. They are better than their parents. And they will be better
than their bosses which makes this the first time in history that the apprentice will know
more about the tools of the trade than does the master. But the job market is not there
because entrepreneurs cannot figure out what to do. Newspapers, magazines and books
are falling to the new digital technologies. All businesses are determining how and where
the new technologies will fit to reduce the need for personnel.
These young persons have no visible way to make money and may have debt from
student loans etc. So, they will have to take odd low-skill or even non-paying jobs and
live with their parents where they will probably just atrophy. An article in the March
2010 issue of the Atlantic spells it out chapter and verse. According to the article, Krysia
Mossakowski, a socialologist at the University of Miami found that long bout of
unemployment in young adults provokes long lasting changes in behavior and mental
health.
In conclusion, during the past 18 months, our present Congress and Administration has
done everything, said everything and planned everything to thwart and discourage private
enterprise. Nothing they can say or do now will make the private enterprise believe, have
confidence in or trust this Congress or Administration. Only a new Congress and new
Administration can resurrect the faith of private investors, and only with that faith will
they create the jobs needed to make our country viable and whole again!
This issue is urgent!! Nothing is more important! We must do everything that we as
individuals can to replace everyone in Congress this November 2010 and to replace the
President in 2012. WE THE PEOPLE can do this! But we must stand up and participate,
regardless of party affiliation, democrat, republican or independent. What the individual
citizen can do is to be heard in every way you can and to vote for the candidates who will
urgently strive to get this country back on track…on the capitalist track!!
PDF Created with deskPDF PDF Writer - Trial :: http://www.docudesk.com

TERM LIMITS...A MUST! By Wayne Pearson

LIMITING TERMS OF CONGRESS MEMBERS IS A MUST
A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT IS REQUIRED
YOU CAN HELP

My earlier blog made the case for firing “for cause” each and everyone of our 535 U.S. Senators and Representatives. We believe that, for the most part, they are incompetent, arrogant, fiscally irresponsible, in some cases corrupt and just plain insubordinate. Lord Acton stated it correctly: “Power Corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely”. The way to limit the power of the elected officials is to reduce the time they have power. TERM LIMITS is the way to accomplish this. Since we cannot count on good faith to have them volunteer to leave after a sensible period in office, we must have a concrete agreement. This means a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to limit their time in office.

After the four terms of Franklin Roosevelt, the Congress and States moved swiftly to put in place the twenty second amendment to the Constitution, enacted on February 21, 1951 which limits the President’s term in office to two four year terms. Now the office of the President has to change key personnel every eight years and sometimes every four years when we, the voters, boot one out.
.
When our elected officials of the Federal Government take the largess of the Nation’s citizens through taxation and then dole funds out to specific localities to curry the favor and votes of their constituents, We citizens are corrupted, as well. How often have you heard the Party leaders caution voters to keep a particular Senator of Representative in office because: “Of all the wonderful things he does for our locale or state”? Does Senator Byrd come to mind? This practice is abominable, is morally just plain wrong. And must be abolished!

With the speed of change in the introduction and application of new technologies, older elected persons have more difficulty keeping up. This can lead to their just abandoning any attempt to understand the new technologies and/or not applying them if they do understand them. In other words they are can become out-of date, obsolete and thus inadequate to the needs of the task. In the world of private enterprise, they would be asked to take early retirement or would be outright fired. Moreover, if such an employee were found with its hand in the till, Well…..!!!

There is a website, Tenure Corrupts.Com that lists the some of the pros and cons of term limits some of which are incorporated here:

ADANTAGES OF TERM LIMITS:
Downgrades seniority, favors meritocracy
The higher turnover of office holders would bring more new ideas and energy.
Increases competition, encourages new challengers.
Builds a ‘citizen’ Congress, drives out career politicians.
Breaks ties to special interests.
Reduces “pork” which is inappropriate and immoral
Reduces the amount of time the elected person would have to spend raising money so more time could be spent on the people’s issues and needs.
Improves tendency to vote on principle. Office holders could make more honest decisions in their last term.
Encourages lower taxes, smaller government, and greater voter participation. Creates a natural reduction in wasteful federal spending.
Gets back to what Founders called “rotation in office.” Gets reelection rates back to near 50%, versus the current 99%.

DISADVANTAGES OF TERM LIMITS
Eliminates good politicians along with the bad.
Loss of knowledge and experience.
Increases the power of staff, lobbies, and bureaucracy.
Reduces range of voter choice.
NOW IS THE TIME!! And the time is ripe! The populace is furious with the excesses of the members of the Senate and the House, and the Tea Partiers and similar organizations are rallied and active. Therefore, this force could be and should be directed and focused like a laser on the issue of term limits. Each of us can help by talking to our Tea Partier friends to encourage them in that direction.

HOW WOULD IT WORK?

Here is a short list of actions to make a Constitutional Amendment Happen.

Work to replace each and every one of the legislators who must run for office this November 2010.
Chose only office seekers who are amenable to limiting terms
Make those office seekers sign a document that clearly states that they will be willing to introduce and vote for an amendment to the Constitution which limits terms.
Have the document dated and notarized and made public.
Support the Tea Partiers to keep the public fired up about this issue during the several years that it will take to get the legislation through Congress and get the States to ratify the Amendment.