Farewell to 2006
Hello and welcome 2007
Hope the 2 people that read this blog have a safe and fun New Years celebration.
See you in the new year.
Who knows, maybe the boss will start posting more and we can revive the blog to its former glory with 10 readers.
Wow, this is post 899, will leave post 900 for the boss (if he is reading this and willing to post, hint, hint, hint).
Fun article about things we learned in 2006.
Enjoy.
Former President Ford passed away this week and the papers are full of stories about the man. I am glad they are honoring him now, even if they didn't honor him while he was in office, actually most of the papers reviled him when he was in office.
The NY Times has an article about Ford when he was in the Navy during WW2 and how his actions saved the lives of many of his shipmates.
Its good to recall these stories because they show the character of the man (or woman).
Enjoy and for President Ford, RIP.
Since New Years Eve is coming up the Washington Post has an article on the number of people killed in automobile accidents each year. The US loses about 44,000 people a year due to driving accidents. So in any given year you will have a 0.0126% chance of dieing in an automobile accident.
Of course if you are a teenager, talk on the cell phone, drink and drive or do drugs and drive, your chance goes up significantly.
Also, if you drive a Mini-Cooper your chance is also much higher. The laws of physics dictate that when an Hummer H2 and a Mini-Cooper meet in an accident, the Hummer will get a scratched bumper and the Mini will be heavily damaged.
Of course the author of the article, Peter Woolley, thinks the answer is to have stronger and slower cars, more government regulation and separate cars and trucks on the highway.
Well, for stronger and slower cars, think Hummer H1, its very safe and can survive an accident and isn't used in street racing too much. It also drinks gasoline in large quantities.
Separate cars and commercial trucks on the road. Ok, so we have to double the highway system so cars can have their lanes and trucks there's. Whose willing to give their homes so all these additional roads can be built?
More regulation?? Well he isn't specific on it so we know it means more work for regulators and most likely little safety for the rest of us.
Lets face it, traveling at 60 miles an hour is dangerous. If someone is so concerned about the human costs, they do not have to drive and can walk. Walking is much safer then driving after all. There are trade offs in life and as a society, we have felt that the benefits of fast travel outweighs the costs. At the individual level it can be very difficult. Losing a loved one to an accident is hard, however, as a society we have to decide if the cost being paid is worth it.
Some ideas:
1. When driving, limit cell phone and ALWAYS use hands free. If the call is that important, get off the road so you can concentrate on it.
2. Don't drink and drive.
3. Don't drive when too tired or on medication.
If these rules were followed the death rate on American highways would decline, especially among the newer drivers.
LAPD about 7,500 officers, I THINK fewer then 5 are killed in the line of duty each ear. So over the last 3 years, 15 were killed or 0.2% of the force.
US Military in Iraq about 130,000 troops at any given time. 3,000 have been killed over the last 3 years or 2.3% of the force.
Iraqi police, the force went from zero to 188,000 and 12,000 have been killed over the last 3 years. That means 6.38% of the force has been killed and is much higher then being in the US military or a member of LAPD.
The Iraqi police are still getting all the recruits they can handle and will need even more as they weed out the bad apples but there are still many people who are willing to join and hopefully fight for Iraq.
The US Military has meet its recruitment goal for FY 2006, which ended Sept 30. While the recruiting stations haven't been mobbed, the military is still able to get the people it needs.
Out of the three organizations, LAPD is having the hardest time meeting its recruitment goals. It has not been able to grow the force to the 8,000 members originally planned, let alone for the 15 to 17,000 officers the City would need if it was to have the same police to populace ratio as New York City.
Bush Supports Bigger US Military for Long Ideological Struggle
By Al Pessin 20 December 2006
So the real question is how to pay for this???
Yes we are at war and should be giving the military what ever it needs, but building up new units takes a long time and is expensive. Its not like buying a ship or tank, you have to pay the people and that is still the biggest cost of the US military.
Well here are some ideas on how to pay for a bigger military without raising taxes or increasing the debt. Other ideas? Please comment (and let me know I'm not talking in an echo chamber).
1. Cut Congress' pay by 20%
2. Eliminate the defined pension for all members of Congress, give them a 401K with matching.
3. Eliminate medical care for former members of Congress, let them rely on Medicare like the rest of us when they reach 65.
4. Cut Congressional staff by 20%, let the members open their own mail.
Ok, I know doing that will feel good but won't save much money so here are some real money saving ideas:
5. Eliminate ALL farm subsidies. If one wants to farm or ranch, you take the risks. Also eliminate quotas on the amount of crops farmers can grow. Yes this will lead to fewer farmers but that is capitalism.
6. Eliminate all federal funding for roads, rail or airports execept for the interstate highways and that is only funded by the federal gas tax, no more bridges to no-where paid for by the federal government.
7. Eliminate federal funding for education K - 12 and eliminate federal education mandates. Its the State's job so let them do it. Also States will be forced to compete for jobs and companies by offering better schools. Also eliminate federal requirements for K-12 education, again that is a State function. If a State wants everyone to learn PC only garbage, the voters can change the State's mind or move. Allow the States to compete on education as well as on other things.
Other ideas?
Yes, the KC-767 is being built and delivered to customers. Oh, not the US Air Force, we can't replace our 40 to 50 year old KC-135's, after all, they haven't dropped out of the sky on a school yet so our fearless leaders think we can keep flying them.
Who cares if the airframes have so much time on them they are not safe (the FAA would ground the entire KC-135 fleet if it was a passenger airline instead of military) due to the amount of time the planes have flown.
But the Japanese and the Italians are getting their new tankers and who knows maybe we can get some new ones before 2040.
Modern planes and engines, which can fly farther, carry more and use less fuel, yeah, that's not important to our Air Force who is operating more of its planes from the US then from foreign bases.
Gotta love our "leaders" don't you?
Boy, first the boss (aka owner of this blog) changes the address because he wanted to ditch his original personal blog on another popular free blog site for some reason and now Google is requiring us to switch to our Google accounts before we can add or edit any posts.
Ok, so I haven't posted anything for a few months or more. Boss wants this blog revived so have to write something and will post the story I meant to post next.
So, now it's flown. Pretty, isn't it? Sure beats what the competition was trying to sell--a cross between a guppy and a wide-mouth bass.
The F-35 along with the F-22 promise to usher in a new era of American airpower. This is an exciting time for the F-35 program, having just completed first flight and components of all three varients in various stages production.
