Saturday, January 5, 2013

Amusing objection to trillion dollar coin

It's amusing because they're citing a difference that doesn't make a difference.  To illustrate:  let's look at how they do it now.

To start, how much does it cost the government to print a $100 bill?  I don't know myself, so let's just say it costs a penny for each bill.  That is a ratio of 10000 times its actual cost to produce--- $100/.01= 10000.

By the way, to run monetary policy, they don't even have to print the money.  They can do just accounting entries.  Maybe the ratio is closer to a million to 1.  After all, how much does an accounting entry cost?  lol

Let's say platinum's price is about $1600 per oz.  That means with the same ratio, you could strike a $16 million dollar coin.  Okay, that's not a trillion, but in principal, how is it different?  Just to run the numbers, you need 62,500 coins of this denomination to make a trillion.  Would you feel better if they had to make all those coins?  It would cost the Treasury about the cost of 2 tons of platinum, or 1/10000th or their true value.  Sure, they still aren't worth that much that it says its worth, but neither are those bills in your wallet nor those coins in your pocket.

You'll probably object by saying that I don't know what I'm talking about.  If you do think that way, then please tell me how it is actually done.  That's because that's the way it was taught to me while I was in school.  Maybe the way I learned it all was wrong.

I'm not missing the point either.  I suspect those of you who object are the ones missing the point.  Our currency is actually worthless.  It is only "worth" something because somebody in authority says it is.

They say our debt is 16 trillion, but a lot of that is hocus-pocus too.




Different story, same result

The more I dig into this ammonia as fuel concept, the more it looks like the story of Thorium.  Look at this quote from a speech given by Greg Vezina on the topic of using his technology for the use of ammonia as a fuel:

I can tell you one thing. When the average American and
Canadian citizen finds out that we have the technology and
we’ve had the technology for a quarter of a century or longer
to do this
, and that this is not about energy and this is not
about the environment and this is not about economics – this
is about freedom. This is about you don’t have to go to war
with anybody anymore because you don’t have to fight with
them, because you don’t have to leave where you are to go
to the land of the free because you can use your own
indigenous resources to create your own energy and your
own economics and your own job and your own future.[ emphasis added]

 Bingo.  That's what I found out about Thorium, and looky here, the same is true about ammonia.

Glory be!

If you are inclined to believe in conspiracies, here's a video of someone who says that it is one. Actually, he closes with the statement that anyone who pushes hydrogen is a liar. Well, I'm not lying.   Evidentally, he doesn't know that you can electrolyze ammonia for its hydrogen.  That avoids the problems he's talking about with respect to non-portability of hydrogen.

Not everyone agrees, but there's common ground.   Get on that common ground.

 

Ammonia Powered Car ( update )

This post started out with the idea of analyzing the costs of bio-Ammonia, so I put together a couple of posts and considered doing a re-post of both.  The first was this post:   Hydrolysis (electrolysis) of Ammonia  That one was about using an ammonia solution as a carrier for hydrogen for fuel cells.  Then I remembered that you can actually run an internal combustion engine on ammonia, so I looked up that post.  Thus, it has turned into an update of the Ammonia Powered Car.

Not that using ammonia for a fuel cell is a bad idea.  That can come later.  That's because as Greg Vezina points out, we already have the infrastructure for making and storing ammonia.  We can use existing infrastructure and automotive technologies--- no need for exotic new technologies.  Therefore, every car on the road can be converted and will run on this stuff now.   Vezina's video:


With respect to the costs of biofuels, Dynamotive's existing technology can convert biomass into fuel at competitive prices. Now, if you were to get the biomass at the lower end of the cost range as depicted in this graphic below, you can definitely compete with fossil fuels on the basis of price.

http://www.dynamotive.com/fuels/#industrialfuels

So, $30 a ton for biomass can yield drop-in fuels at less than $2 a gallon.  How much would seaweed cost to produce per ton?  A 64K dollar question, that is.

If that question can be answered affirmatively, then all of this can be done economically and simultaneously cleaning up the environment.  What's not to like about it?


Friday, January 4, 2013

The United States Of Delusion

Zero Hedge / Of Two Minds  link via Free Republic

Quote:
Does anyone seriously think that counterproductive "investments" in diminishing returns will "grow our way out of debt"? Of course not; everyone with a vested interest in the crumbling Status Quo is terrified that their share of the borrowed/printed swag will be cut. So the only alternative is to cling to a delusional state where belief in the impossible replaces a realistic assessment of risk, cost and consequence.[ emphasis added]

The irony is that this strategy of clinging to delusion rather than face the necessity of deep cuts in borrow-and-squander budgets will lead to the involuntary reset of the entire system, depriving every vested interest of their share of the swag. Is delusion a sustainable state? No. Thus we can confidently predict that causality, factuality and karma will eventually sweep aside delusion and all those who cling to it.

Comment:

"Belief in the impossible" is emphasized in the above text because it appears to be something that is endemic in the culture.

People want to believe in something, so they believe in the impossible.  A theory to the reason for this is that it replaces religion.  The Belief in the Impossible becomes a replacement for the belief in The Almighty.

Funny thing.  Those who believe in the impossible probably think they are rational as compared to those who believe in The Almighty.  But believing in God releases one to think about earthly things in a more rational way.

The negativity is overwhelming out there

Look, I know things are bad.   I know that the Republicans caved in like they usually do.  I suspect that more of the same is ahead.  But the ship of state hasn't sunk yet.

It kind of reminds me of some kids that I remember seeing when I was a kid myself.  They got into trouble and started crying even before they got punished.  Why don't you folks wait until the true trouble starts before you start crying a river?  You remind me of those kids, and frankly, it's kinda embarrassing to see all this whining out there.

There's comparisons with Argentina and the Perons.  Yeah, it might even be true, but still, it hasn't happened yet.

There's a lot of super negative talk like rebellions and civil wars and such.  Do you think all that talk is helpful in any constructive way?

Just saying, let's look for some common areas with our adversaries.  I know that seems impossible, but at least make the effort.  Too soon to give up.  Yeah, I know.  I may be wearing rose colored glasses, but it is better than acting like Henny Penny and running around like the sky is falling.  It hasn't happened yet, people.  It may not even happen at all.


Mea culpa on the "me too"

It may be worth explaining in more detail the reasons why I support some ideas that could be described as "green".  After all, I have been critical of certain conservatives, or all conservatives, who seemed to have accepted the premises of the left.  Being somewhat "green" in my way of thinking is one of them, hence the effort at explanation.

To explain, it will be necessary to look back in time.

Back in 2004, I noticed that the demand for oil was outstripping the supply.  So, I wrote this short blurb in the original Boots and Oil blog that I had been writing in for awhile back then:



Ever since that time, I've been researching ways to solve this problem.  I figured at the time that it might be "the next big thing".  In a way, it was.  Prices went up to $150 per barrel and have stayed not too far below that for the last 4 years.

Of course I've read about Peak Oil, but that doesn't mean that I believe in it.  However, there is a bias towards not developing our own fossil fuel resources in this country--- there is a Political Peak Oil.  Despite the hostility, fracking has increased supplies, and the USA may be on its way towards energy self-sufficiency. However, I don't consider this to be a permanent solution to the energy problem.  That's because the left will not accept this turn of events.  They will attempt to shut it down due to their supposed concerns about global warming.  Therefore, I accept the fact that we have to acknowledge the left even though we don't necessarily have to agree with them.  Hence, my acceptance of one of their premises.

At some point, carbon emissions will have to end.  If there's one premise that I accept, it is that one.  Besides the left's hostility towards fossil fuels, it must also be noted and acknowledged that we are changing the atmosphere by using them.  I am of the opinion that this isn't a desirable outcome over the long run.  Therefore, fossil fuels will have to be phased out eventually.  The argument shouldn't be about carbon emissions per se, but how to end them eventually without destroying the economic basis of the country.

My research into energy solutions led me to invest in a company called Altair Nano, which makes batteries.  So, this was research that was intended to make money.  That investment didn't work out, but my research didn't stop.  It is all a part of being informed, like being informed about politics.  It is a never ending requirement for an investor or entrepreneur.

Becoming informed about the political situation is important.  That affects the economic situation, which in turn affects stock prices.  I had to learn this the hard way.  This isn't necessarily the best way to learn things.  Something that, when it comes to politics, everyone should take heed of.

Conservatives may not like this, but the government is going to be a factor in the economy for the foreseeable future.  Even more so now that Obama has won a second term.  Therefore, politics is going to matter.  In a perfect world, it wouldn't matter so much, but this, alas, is not a perfect world.

I see it this way--- either you go with the flow, or the flow will sweep over you like a tsunami.  If you go with the flow, you can affect events in a way that is more to your liking.  If you fight it, and you lose, you may end up with something far worse.

I don't like the political deal that was just made, but I suppose I could be more philosophical about it and accept it.  That's just the nature of the beast right now and you can only get what you can get.

Nevertheless, sometimes you have to fight.  I still think that a fight was worthwhile on this budget deal, but maybe not everybody agrees.  It may well be worth remembering that even amongst those with whom you agree that there will still be differences.  Perhaps better to go with the flow as opposed to the flow rolling over you like a tsunami.

After all, a thing is what it is.


BS from the BLS

Who can believe the usual crock of Shiite that comes from the government each and every day?

According to Zero Hedge, the government has thus spoken--- 155k new jobs.  That's according to the establishment part, I prefer the household data cuz it's harder to fudge.

28k more people working, population ratio working v nonworking has DROPPED, fewer people in workforce--- this is progress?!?



Planting weeds? An unconventional solution to say the least.

Sargassum is not so rare, actually it is quite common.  You learn something new every day.  Well, it's new to me anyway.  It washes up onshore in the nearby locale of Crystal Beach, Texas.   A little over an hour's drive from downtown Houston.

Question:  could you transplant this stuff into the Dead Zone, and will it grow there? This book might give clues to answering that question.  If it could grow there, it would bring the Dead Zone to life and it would turn the dirty water into beautiful crystal blue water.  Well, maybe it wouldn't, but the video below seems to find a strong correlation between clean water and sargassum.

Change is in the Air – Seaweed, Seaweed Everywhere!

Over recent weeks, scientists and resource managers in such diverse places as Trinidad, the Dominican Republic and Sierra Leone have been reporting unusual incidents of seaweed washing ashore in massive quantities. The seaweed is a type of brown algae known as Sargassum, which commonly drifts on ocean currents of the North Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. This algae is well-known for washing up en masse on beaches in places such as Florida, Texas and Bermuda.




Update:

Uses for Sargassum

Alternative Uses of Sargassum



Glenn Becks's worldview unacceptable, Al Jazeera's is--- thus saith the Goreacle

Ace

"Glenn Beck's The Blaze approached Current about buying the channel last year, but was told that 'the legacy of who the network goes to is important to us and we are sensitive to networks not aligned with our point of view,' according to a person familiar with the negotiations."

Comment:

Nice to know what the worldview is of the guy who nearly became president.  Not that I watch any TV at all.  But to put an Arab network ahead of an American because of his worldview?  The left is truly batty, not to mention hypocritical with respect to the tax avoidance nature of the deal.


Deliverance from the Dead Zone

What's with the title?  What's this Dead Zone stuff, an allusion to a Steven King novel?  Throw in the reference to the Burt Reynolds movie and it looks like a double ripoff.  Yeah, well I have to do something to get your attention.  Very funny.  Ha, ha.  Funnier than a barrel of Congresscritters.

Actually, the title is reference to The Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone --- where nothing lives.  The Deliverance part is a proposed solution that is a speculation alert.  Why?  Because I don't know if it will work, or even if it could work, whether or not our corrupt system will actually allow a solution to a problem to be implemented.

The idea is to grow seaweed in the Dead Zone.  Harvest the seaweed and make biofuels out of it.  Eventually, the drop-in biofuels could be converted to hydrogen for fuel cells.  You kill two birds with one stone.  Eliminate the Dead Zone and lick the global warming "problem".  Throw in energy security as a bonus.  What's not to like?  Heck, you could create a lot of jobs and economic growth with this.  Only a Congresscritter could hate it.

Let's look at the Gulf shall we?  First of all, consider its typography---depth of the Gulf of Mexico.  The Dead Zone lies directly offshore on the shallow shelf area.  A good place to put something there if it requires a shallow body of water.  Here's some more info on Gulf of Mexico pollution via Wikipedia.  I figured that since algae already grows there in this Dead Zone, you could substitute the seaweed and force the red tide out of the picture.  Voila!  End of red tides and the Dead Zone.

You would need a massive public works project to implement the idea.  The shelf areas of the Gulf are probably not conducive to the growth of seaweed, so you may have to add something to the shelf that the seaweed can attach to.  That is, seaweed clings to rocks, but the bottom of the Gulf is sandy.  Replace the sand with rocks or something else, like chicken wire perhaps?

You could start small and work your way up.  Perhaps the 8000 square mile area could be divvied up amongst entrepreneurs parcel-by-parcel until the entire Dead Zone is covered in seaweed farms.

This isn't necessarily a novel idea.  They do a lot of this in Asia, as noted in an earlier post.  Here's a few links on the subject that I "dredged up" ( pardon the pun) on the subject.



Puzzling contradictions in the markets shouldn't puzzle anyone really

Yesterday, the price of gold took a hit to the downside.  Evidently, there was a move upwards in the dollar.

There isn't anything that I can see that supports this notion of bullishness in the dollar.  But there was news that the Federal Reserve may be ending QE later this year.  That contradicts earlier stories that the Fed will be doing QE out the wazzoo.  What gives?

Go back to the Kyle Bass video link posted here earlier this week.  Bass was saying something to the effect that policy makers can't tell the truth and won't tell the truth.  Therefore, whatever you're hearing from the government is probably wrong.  This jibes with the link here which says that the Fed can't stop QE even if they wanted to.

So, the price of gold and precious metals drops.  Those who are in the markets are being manipulated.  So, what else is new?

I could point to a series of links to support the notion that our government and society is in full corruption mode, but I don't suppose it should be any surprise to anybody who knows anything about anything.  Those most surprised would be the most gullible amongst us.  Otherwise known as Obama voters who believe everything that our corrupt media and government tell us.

What the heck?  Let's put up some links!


Update:

Heavens to Murgatroid!   I forgot about Boner being re-elected as Speaker!  This shoots to hell all credibility that the Republicans may have had.  How in the hell do you vote against the fiscal cliff deal that Boner orchestrated and then vote for him as Speaker?!?  They only thing more credulous than the Obamabots are the "conserva-Nots" ( just coined that term).


Thursday, January 3, 2013

Indonesia to Host World’s Largest Algae Farm

Posted on November 8, 2011

SINGAPORE — Pahang State in central Malaysia is about to become home to the world’s largest commercial farm project producing microalgae for biofuel….When completed, the farm could produce about 500,000 tons of dry biomass a year, with an oil yield of about 30 percent, equivalent to 150,000 tons of biofuel per year,…

Well, it's a start.  This appears to be an attempt to produce an algae for its oil.   As written earlier today, I have a different idea.

Another story here.   A quote from that story:
Everyone in the world that matters is talking about algae—many for energy and biofuel, and some for chemical resources. As the world shies away from chemicals, more and more companies are looking into algae as the source for many products.

Quite a sweeping statement.

Anyway, it may well be worth studying that development.

Update:

One more story before I quit on this post.

Was the BP disaster created in order to turn the Gulf into an algae farm?

I linked to this story because of the notion that the Gulf of Mexico could be used this way.


The One has Spoken

Obama: I'm Not Even Going to Debate the Debt Ceiling

There's a quote of Obama that is really telling here:

"As I've demonstrated throughout the past several weeks, I am very open to compromise," he said. "But we cannot simply cut our way to prosperity."

Lol.  He compromised in his view.  Ohhhh kay!

Another thing:  he shows that he believes that we can spend our way to prosperity.  In a perfect nutshell, there's liberalism for you.  Only through the government can prosperity be restored.   Only by spending like a drunken sailor can prosperity be restored.  These capitalists are just there for window dressing.  Whatever they do, doesn't matter at all.

This is why the Republicans lost this round.  They accepted his premises when they acknowledged the "fiscal cliff".  Now, how in the world can they argue against all the spending?  The answer is that they can't and that they won't.

What the hay, Part III, disparate notes

Related posts put together in a type of series on how to get a hydrogen source at an affordable price.  The latest idea is to use algae for that purpose.

By way of review, let's start with this post:

Haber+Sabatier+Bosch+LFTRs+ Oil shale = Clean energy independence

The objection here could be from using fossil fuels.  So, the idea moved on to biologic sources of hydrogen.

What the hay?

What the hay, Part II


That brings us to algae.

Why algae?  Is more prolific producer of biomass.  Shouldn't be interested in producing oils, just biomass.  Want to pyrolyze it to make biogas and biofuels.  Also makes biochar, to improve soils.  Canadian company already doing this--- Dynamotive .  Dynamotive doesn't push algae, though.  They make biofuels via pyrolysis.

If you avoid the algal strains that are meant to maximize oil production, you can simplify the algae production.  The idea is simplicity in order to get costs down.  Natural strains of algae will be the most hardy and probably the cheapest, in my opinion.  I looked at Sargassum yesterday.

You may want to use seawater as opposed to fresh water.  You don't want to add to fresh water shortages.

An idea here is to use ponds close to the sea.

An idea I got yesterday was to use LFTR's for process heat for pyrolyzing algae biomass for fuel.  Why LFTR's?  The energy is cheaper than coal.  Secondly, don't make electricity, only make process heat.  The nuclear reactions will produce the process heat.  Avoiding the production of electricity will make it more efficient.  The best you can hope for if you make electricity is about in the 40% range efficiency.  If you avoid that step, you make the energy produced more than doubled in efficiency.  That and the low price potential of this type of energy should help in the goal towards getting hydrogen prices down to competitive levels.

I don't know how Dynamotive gets its process heat.  They may use the biofuels themselves.  However, the biofuels aren't necessarily the cheapest, so why go that route?

Even if you can get the prices of hydrogen down to low enough levels, you still have a problem with the cost of platinum.  That's why astroidal platinum comes in.  You need to solve the launch problem for that, which is one of the ideas that I've explored a lot on this blog.

An alternative to platinum fuel cells is Solid Oxide Fuel Cells.  But those are too heavy.  If the weight problem can be solved, then asteroidal platinum won't be necessary.

Putting it together into a comprehensive plan. You will need a comprehensive plan to make all these ideas work.

Update:

It is May 27th, 2013.  Five months ago, I posted this with missing pieces of the comprehensive plan.  Those pieces have now been found.

You can read about them in these series of posts of which this one is a part.

The first missing piece was the fuel cell.  I found a solution to this one in this series called Electric cars are feasible today.

Actually, upon further review, the Apollo fuel cell / hydrogen generation system will work by itself.  But I found yet another way to make it work, although it may be an inferior design to Aronsson's.






Psst! The Republican Cave on Fiscal Cliff really a win.

That's the sense I'm getting while surfing the web this early am.  A list of posts to support this view via Instapundit.


The last two were by Jennifer Rubin, who was in the tank for Romney.  Now, she appears to be pushing for a return of the Bush clan.  While I applaud a defense of Bush, I'm not so sure that this is a good idea.

Also, we are being told this, I suppose, in order to feel better about a defeat.  I'm not going to join that one, thank you very much.


Wednesday, January 2, 2013

Bottom line

The bottom line is that Obama got 85 Republicans to do what he wanted.

There are arguments on the other side that what he really wanted was Clinton's tax rates.  But if he wanted that, why did he push for this?

Another argument could be made that this was a no-win situation.  True, but something could have been won.  They decided to take this "tax-cut", but that was too cheap of a price.   Boner did the bidding of Obama--- that's the bottom line.

Obama succeeded in splitting the Republicans.  That's what the significance of this is.  Boner should not have allowed that.  Evidently, he can't take the heat from the media.  He may not be afraid of the heat from the rest of his party that didn't go with him.   That remains to be seen.

Let's see if the rest of the bunch can take some heat from the media and get rid of Boner.   If Boner goes, you might keep the party together.


Driving on "Snot" and Ice

I think they meant "Snow" and Ice.

Nice blog, btw.  I wanted to steal that pic.  It's a doozy.  But, you'll just have to follow the link.


House Vote (Update – Passes 257-167)

legal insurrection

Comment:

It appears this vote is getting bad reviews.  The question now is, will there be a new speaker?

Pundit Press: Boehner's Speakership in Peril

Pundit Press: Boehner's Speakership in Peril: Perhaps the biggest political story line coming out of the House's affirmative vote for the Senate's short term band-aid to the fiscal clif...

Comment:

This was Boner's fault.  If two thirds of the Republicans wouldn't vote for this bill, he could have withheld it from the floor for a vote.  Wasn't there an unwritten rule for a majority of the majority?  As soon as he promised to bring up the Senate's bill for a vote, the die was cast.  To vote for Boner as Speaker now is to vote for what has just happened.

Are we about to get more Kabuki theater?  Or will Boner go down?  For if Boner doesn't go down, those who opposed the deal that just passed will be pulling our leg with respect to their supposed opposition to the fiscal cliff deal.  They will be phony baloney plastic banana as the Democrats.


The Tax Deal Is The Road To Serfdom

Jeff Carter, pointsandfigures

Excerpts:
  • When are we going to stop demonizing people that are successful?
  • Spending isn’t going to go down in this country and right now we are on the Road to Serfdom.
  • the middle class got snookered. They will ultimately pay the higher tax rates but they won’t notice it on their tax bill
  • Interest rates are being held artificially low at 0%. Why is that artificial? Because it doesn’t reflect the true cost of money.
  • Here are my fiscal projection for 2013.
    The tax hikes will generate less revenue than the projection.
    Government debt will increase at a greater marginal rate than it has in the past, and become a greater percentage of GDP.

Comment:

Here's another case of where Romney screwed up.  He didn't even mention the "fiscal cliff".  This phony crisis was foisted upon the public as soon as Obama was safely re-elected.  There was no consent of the governed.  The fiscal cliff negotiations were Kabuki theater.  So were the 2011 debt negotiations which made this fiscal cliff scenario possible.

Second observation:  the Republicans are badly divided.  For 80 (or so) Republicans to vote for this thing in the House was an indication that they can't  ( or won't) offer any meaningful opposition to the Democrats.  It's the me-too party---not an opposition party.  That was fast.  That prediction came true on the first day of the new year.

Third observation:  the real force governing this country is based upon the media and big government.  Too many people have been trained to think in terms of Keynesian economics.  These people make up a majority who keep dutifully voting for what doesn't work---because they've been trained to.  The media reinforces what has been drilled into the heads of the public at the big government schools.  It is so bad that that the potential opposition party is infected with this dysfuntional philosophy and can't or won't offer an alternative.  Thus, they accept the premises of the left and the conclusion follows inescapably.


Tuesday, January 1, 2013

How to...make a Hobo stove! HD

jihadacadien

Learn the hobo ways!  It may come in handy, you know.



Boehner's 100 loyal soldiers might give him political cover on 'fiscal cliff'

The Hill

The 100 is actually 92 which is actually less than that.

Nevertheless, there's plenty to worry about here.  If the GOP is this divided, it is not a good sign.  It shows that Obama will likely be successful eventually.


Selling out

We are being told that the reason there wasn't a vote last night by the House is so that they can claim that they are voting on a tax cut, not a tax increase.  That's because the law will have expired, and all the rates will have reverted back to the Clinton rates.  Thus, any vote to decrease taxes will be a tax cut because the rates are already at higher rates as the vote is taken.

But it is a sell-out nevertheless.  Obama is probably going to be successful in dividing and conquering us because these people will not be true to the original intent of the tax cut.  The original intent was to give a tax cut to everybody.  Thus, any tax cuts should be the same.  Otherwise, it is a sell-out.

Selling out is easier than holding out.  After all, only 1% or so will see their taxes going up.  Why risk the anger of the 99%?

For selling out, there should be a reckoning.  They should be prepared to lose their jobs en masse if they sell out.  They are clearly more afraid of the 99% than they are afraid of those who put them in their places.

It will be easy for them to betray because the people who put them there in their places will not see the principle that must be defended.  Obama is attempting to conquer us by dividing us.  If everyone, or just a large minority insisted upon everybody getting a tax cut or nobody getting one, there could be no betrayal.  The stakes would be too high.

It is the same way Hitler took over Germany.  Blame some small group, like the Jews, then use that as leverage to enslave a nation.  That's because not enough saw the necessity to defend the few against the machinations of a megalomaniac who was hell-bent on enslaving the many.

Guns will be next.  Then the conquest will be complete.

Update:

The only way to defend a vote for this is to get something in return that offsets it.  I think an appropriate thing to get in return for a yes vote for this thing is to repeal Obamacare.  Attach that to this cliff deal as an amendment.  Otherwise, vote against it.  A vote for it is a sell-out.


Slavo: You Know How This Ends Right? This Ends Through War.

shtfplan.com

Excerpts:
  • In 2006, when Americans were flying high on ever-expanding credit and double digit real estate growth, hedge fund manager Kyle Bass came to the conclusion that something was very wrong.
  • When the real estate bubble did finally burst, stock markets plummeted and mortgage backed securities fell to pennies on the dollar. Bass and his hedge fund made billions in the process.
  • Bass’ foresight was 20/20, and now he has issued a warning so dire that it, like the real estate crisis and recession that followed, is unimaginable for most Americans.
  • At some point in the (near) future, the plug is going to be pulled and no one is going to lend anyone any more money. We saw this on a small scale in 2008 [ comment:  It was actually 2007, because that is when I went long to short due to the inevitability of a recession.]
  • Like the mafia does when debts don’t get paid, our creditors are eventually going to resort to ‘breaking some legs.’...so the tools used to ‘take care of it’ won’t be crowbars or baseball bats, but rather, soldiers, tanks and intercontinental ballistic missiles

In Bass's talk linked above, he says that Japan is going to have a big bond crisis in the next couple years.  He says that Europe has not recapitalized their banking system yet.  ( Evidently, that's bad)  China's financial position is much more precarious than most people realize.  Trade is drying up.  Demographics are going to clash with unsustainable policies.

He doesn't predict who will be fighting who.  You can speculate on that one on your own.


Alden: Why Americans Are Stupid

absoluterights.com

Excerpts:
  • For some reason the federal government does not want to get an exact account of how many illegal immigrants we have or how much illiteracy there is in the US.
  • Such studies would not interest the multicultural US elites who do not really want to know the truth
  • As I discovered, educating for dumb and a dumber in the US goes back some time in our history.
  • By applying advertising and agitation in just the right proportions, our adversaries learned they could create a mob mentality and suppress independent thinking. Technically, this is called the science of coercion. If done properly, one can fool nearly all the people all the time.”
  • We are paying billions to maintain a system which is ineffective and dangerous—because it is not teaching people the critical intellectual skills which are crucial to making economic and political decisions for themselves.

Comment:

In other words, we are stupid because our masters want us that way.  Wise up, dumbasses.


Monday, December 31, 2012

Our saviors...( sigh )

Democratic officials: Fiscal 'cliff' deal reached

Economists in and out of government have warned that a combination of tax hikes and spending cuts could trigger a new recession, and the White House and Congress have spent the seven weeks since the Nov. 6 elections struggling for a compromise to protect the economy.

The tax hikes and spending cuts would inconvenience a lot of people, but that's not what causes recessions.

The politicians get to slap each other on the back for a job well done, but it is all a kabuki theater.  In order to believe these politicians, you have to believe that by extending the Bush tax cuts, you are saving the economy.  But these same Bush tax cuts are what was supposed to have caused all of our troubles in the first place.  What a load of bullcrap.

The House should just stand aside and let the Clinton tax rates resume and wait until we all get rich. /sarc



The Times Gives Up

nysun.com

Now, in the face of this great swelling of faith in our fundamental national contract, the New York Times has offered a new strategy — abandoning the Constitution altogether. It runs the brainstorm out under the headline “Let’s Give Up on the Constitution.” The piece carries the byline of a professor of constitutional law at Georgetown University, Louis Michael Seidman.
They don't want to give up on the Constitution.  They just want it enforced on others and not themselves.

They are the party of nothing for you, after all.

Theory of Republican Success: Squish-free zone

Let's make it short and sweet.  The theory is this:  firmness.  The Republicans have to stay firm and not make compromises.  If there are to be compromises, the compromises must be limited and get real benefits--- not just promises.

Remember George Bush as being stubborn?  He was a two-term president.  That's a success that Republicans should embrace, but they run from it.  Compare Bush with Romney.  Romney starts off on the right foot with the Benghazi thing, then he goes soft.  He should have stayed firm.   He lost.   Another example:  Arnold Swarzenegger.  He starts off like a lion and ends up as meek as a mouse hiding out in his little hidey hole.  The Governator wasn't a success in governance because he wasn't firm. He did get re-elected--- but for what?  Ronald Reagan was pretty firm.  He did make compromises, and some of them weren't good.  On the whole, though, he was firm.

There's a word for it: "squishes".  Too many squishes in the Republican party.  Got to firm up those squishes.


Salena Zito: Perhaps we're still in Oz

triblive.com

And it easy to see why “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz” can be considered an allegory for today‘s dissatisfaction with politicians: Dorothy still would represent “The Everyman,” the Scarecrow would still represent voters who supported the Wizard (in our case, President Barack Obama) but who don‘t have enough brains to recognize their political interests; the heartless Tin Man could easily represent folks in post-industrial service-industry jobs; the Cowardly Lion could easily stand in for Joe Biden — all roar and no substance.
Hmm.  It doesn't quite jibe with the idea that it is the Federal Reserve, not politicians, that run the economy.  Nice try, though.





Sunday, December 30, 2012

Americans never give up your guns - English pravda.ru

Americans never give up your guns - English pravda.ru

You learn something new every day if your eyes are open.   Get this:
Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lieing guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

If that doesn't tell you enough about these people, nothing can.  One thing you must never do--- and that is give up your guns.   In fact, any attempt to take them should be regarded with extreme suspicion.

Predictions for New Year

Ah, the end of the year is at hand.  What will the New Year bring?

Predictions are about as useful as New Year Resolutions.  But I suppose there's something about them that attracts people's interest.  We all want to know the future and we all want to do better.  But getting there is a problem.

This may be a bit of a different prognostication than what you may be accustomed to.  I won't predict things that are easily checked this time next year.  The big trends tend to move slowly and that is what I'm going to look at with this post.

In politics, I predicted Obama would lose.  So much for that.  However, on the longer term, we have to see what the two parties will do.  At the present, the Democrats are tacking left and the Republicans look like they will do the same.  The thing to look for is how far will it go.  If the Republicans think it is safe for them to do so, they will offer significant opposition to the Democrats.  This may be too charitable to the Republicans, though.  I don't think they really want to be an opposition party.  Let's just say this then--- this year, we will find out if the Republican Party will be an opposition party or a me-too party.  I think me too is more their style.

In economics, it largely depends upon the outcome of the political battles.  If the Republicans grow a spine and stop the Democrats' headlong rush into socialism, we may see a positive response from the economy.  If not, we'll just bump along the bottom as we've been doing.  Things will get "progressively" worse.  So, my prediction is no boom and no bust.  If the Republicans grow a spine, we may even see a boomlet of sorts.

In technology, a lot depends on Elon Musk.  Frankly, I'm getting a little worried about him.  He's taking on too many tasks at once and he has some ideas that may not pan out.  If the reusable rocket ideas he has doesn't pan out, we may have a problem achieving much of note in space.  This guy is the star and if he stumbles, we will stumble with him.  People may resent that assessment, but sorry.  He's the guy getting it done in space as of now.  Better hope that it continues.  I think it will, but I am not as confident as I was.

I don't keep up with consumer goods, so I have no opinion on that.

In energy, some folks have a high opinion on Thorium.  Well, there's good reason to.  But Thorium Energy may not be something we will enjoy here in the USA.  If the country doesn't get its head out of its butt with this enviro socialist nonsense, that technology will be taken over by the Chinese.  I think that this is the likely outcome. Most people don't consider this to be important, but it is.  Energy is the keystone of the economy.  If that keystone fails, then the whole structure is at risk.  An upgrade for the nuclear energy segment is what the doctor ordered, but it isn't clear that Western Civilization is up to the job.

At some point, the enviros will get their way, I'm predicting.  Fossil fuels will so heavily regulated that an abundance of them won't help us much.  It is the same story as with nuclear.  If nuclear can free itself of the enviro lunacy that is killing the West, fossil fuels may be able to continue to serve us.  In the meantime, fusion energy may be able to be perfected.  If not, Thorium can do the job for thousands of years, but we have to let it.  We will probably let it, but only after China leads the way.  We will have to follow or get left behind.

In any case, if socialists take over, all bets are off.  It appears that may be more true than not at this point.


Noon: The Greening of the Economy

Townhall
In Eastern Kentucky and other mining areas you see bumper stickers that say "if it can't be grown, it has to be mined," as testimony that everything comes from somewhere and something and ultimately, that something that is used to make everything is either a commodity from a mine or an agricultural product from a farm, and energy and labor is applied to that product and another product emerges and value is added. You see, wealth does not just appear, it is created, and, in the course of being created, it creates jobs, and families and communities, and states and nations....Unless the population wakes up to the inevitability of this, we are doomed. Unless we shake ourselves really hard from our green-induced stupor, we can expect to be standing on the side of the road with a sign, asking China to rescue us. And when they do, we can be sure, they will rape the redwoods, reopen the rails, and extract the elements that we have so painstakingly saved for them and, in so doing, they will enslave our people and enrich their people and their government. In another time we called it colonialism. What will we call it when it happens to us?

Comment:

What caused this to happen?

Why are so-called "green" policies favored, and traditional ones pushed over the side?

To boil it down to the most simple explanation, it has been the left that has done this.  If you are suffering financially, it is because of the left.  There can be no cure until they are removed from power.  It is as simple as that.  Things cannot get better until they are gone.

If only the Republicans would stop being the punching bag and punch back.  They have the better argument, but they won't make it.  Do they understand the issues at all?



JP Aerospace on NBC Nightly News

How 'bout that?

This reminded me of my post recently about combining a gas gun with a microwave beaming technology in order to send a small payload to orbit.   The idea is for a reusable launch system with fast turnaround.  This  would  make it affordable.  It was a speculative post, as I know of no project like this in the works at all.

Seems rather complex though.  The replacement company for SpaceX in the Stratolaunch project can get small payloads to orbit using the Pegasus rocket.  But it isn't reusable.  So far as I know, Orbital Sciences isn't planning to make their rockets reusable.

Maybe JP gets there eventually, but a few stepping stones wouldn't hurt.  Well, its a thought, anyway.