Weblog

Tuesday July 15, 2008

Is McCain the perfect idiot president for the USA?

In a recent story titled McCain Completee and utter netwit, I was made aware that one of the current contenders for the office of President of the United States is effectively computer illiterate.

There are a couple of gob smacking aspects to this. First is that he is a senator in the current government and appears to make no use of the Internet himself. Obviously many of his drones, err, I mean staffers, can take care of many tasks himself but the reality is he is disconnected from the modern age. Many of us have parents or grandparents who are more technically savy with computers than this guy. It is frightening to think that he is so dependant on others. And to say "Everyones reads Drudge" ... sigh. More likely Drudge got lucky once and now everyone on Capital Hill looks at it. He'd do a much better job by paying attention to websites such as Wikileaks. The next big story won't appear on Drudge first.

But perhaps more importantly, he is glaringly disconnected with the modern age. The Internet is already part of everyday life for tens of millions of Americans and in some cases (like moi :) replaces the role once played by the TV. Heck, I wonder if he even has his own mobile(cell) phone? Or does he have an aide to manage that for him too? And perhaps he doesn't even go to the stalls in the bathroom alone either and needs someone to clean him up afterwards?

So will this stop him being elected? Heck no. There's the Amish communities that live in pockets of the USA are choose to live an evenless technical life. That's not to say that they will (or will not) vote for him, just that there is a really huge spectrum of lifestyles in the USA and that some people will find solace in McCain's choices.

In a country that is filled with Christian fundamentalist groups, and other religious groups (like The Family), that lobby the government and pull strings, it would seem that being connected with God is more important than being connected with the present day world that we live in.

But the United State of America is a democracy, thus if the Americans want they can choose to vote for a continuation of Republican policy to hasten the slide down.

So I'm elitist. Or am I? Yes, the Internet is a tool, just as the phone, car, TV, etc are. Would it be appropriate to elect a President that was unfamiliar with all of these? Perhaps one that couldn't drive?

The most significant danger that we face, all of us who use the Internet, is politicians who do not understand the Internet passing laws about how it should be operated and used. Admittedly this is no easy task as the Internet is constantly changing, evolving, making it hard for even those that work with it to keep up. And how do politicians respond? Bills such as the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act), proposed bills such as he ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement). Having people unfamiliar with the Internet in power poses a very real threat to how it will function in the future. Can you imagine if the luddites such as those that work for the RIAA and MPAA were to be elected to the Whitehouse or Capitol Hill?

Now maybe it is a tall order to expect someone in the President's office or even Government to be familiar with every aspect of everyone's life in the USA, but the Internet is fast becoming as peculiar as the phone. Which is to say that it really isn't all that peculiar and as the backbone of more and more services, it is becoming unavoidable.

If a person wishes to be more connected with God than modern day life then they should do that in the correct way: become a monk or otherwise a member of the church. From time to time that is a calling I find very tempting because it would allow me to be free of many materialistic trappings that I must also pay hommage to.

Politicians don't live in a monestary or in the service of the church, they live in service to us. While political leaders are often sworn in by a member of the clergy, it is really with every one of their constituents that they should be swearing an oath to, regardless of which way they voted (or not.)

Thursday July 10, 2008

Israel, Iran, USA, Oil and WW3 - what day do you predict?

In the last week, Iran has been testing some its missles, commentators in Israel and Iran have been discussing how they're not sure where all the correct places are to bomb (in order to put a halt on Iran's nuclear program) and the price of oil has been doing a roller coaster ride.

With a bunch of old men in various positions in both Israel and Iran (and possibly the USA too), it seems inevitable that there is going to be some sort of military action, so the question becomes when and not if.

Now add to that the possibility of Iran striking back, possibly including targetting the USA (if the USA doesn't join Israel first up), then we now have Iran vs Israel & USA. Those odds would seem stacked against Iran but given the USA's commitment elsewhere (i.e. Iraq and the trouble it has had there), it isn't in a position to do much on the ground in Iran unless it is willing to give up Iraq. What are the odds on the USA will increase its exposure in the middle east? Not likely but that will more likely be influenced by the Jewish community here in the USA - what strings can they pull if Israel doesn't want to go it alone.

Now if the USA joins the fray with Israel (because Iran decides those naval vessels close by are inviting targets), who else is likely to join in Iran's cause? Syria? Others? Russia and China have both resisted the USA in the UN Security council when the USA has pushed for hard sanctions or outcomes on Iran, so one has to wonder to what extent they will pitch in. On the Russian side, they're in the process of supplying one of their most advanced air defence systems to Iran, so there's an obvious friendship here. A point to note is that the commentary on an Israel/USA attack on Iran's nuclear program is desirable before the completion of that air defence project in order to increase its chance of success.

So it would seem that the pieces are now being arranged on the board for some sort of skirmish.

There are two potential wildcards at play here - both the American and Iranian administrations in power are not at all popular with the public at large in their respective countries and at least one has a similar problem on a global scale. The political cost (if it is at all cared about) for voluntarily joining any fray vs Iran is quite possibly too high, but retaliation could be sold. It seems highly unlikely that Iran will strike first, but retaliation might sell - or even be necessary.

So, for you gentle readers, I've got two questions:

Somehow I feel like I should offer a prize to whoever gets both of these questions right, but I'm not sure that any prize for a pair of answers except "never" and "no" is really the sort of prize anyone should offer.

In closing I'll comment on this and its coupling with oil. It should be without a doubt that any attack on Iran is going to further threaten oil supplies and thus drive the price further up. Already the USA is sending $700 billion per year out of the country to pay for oil... if the country isn't broke already, at that rate how long before it is? With the GDP of the USA being 60% made up from consumer spending, if the balance continues to tip towards more money being spent on oil, can the USA afford for there to be any conflict in the middle east that results in an increase of the amount of money devoted to filling up their cars and trucks?

Wednesday May 28, 2008

Americans getting on 2 wheels in favour of 4

In a story titled "No Radical Change Yet", Jim mentioned that Americans are still getting to work the same as they have been. Alas, there is already a change in the works: people are buying scooters to replace the car as the means to get to work. While there has been more coverage of this recently (see below), the issue first popped into the papers back in 2004 - "U.S. Scooter Sales Thriving With Gas Prices High".

So change is afoot, as evidenced by just this story, Vespa sales are on the rise, where a local Vespa dealer (in Ohio) has sold as many scooters in one month (April 2008) as he did in all of 2007. And it is happening throughout the country - Milwaukee: Vespa Scooter Sales Soaring On High Gas Prices.

But there's one other catch here: the sales, at present, are all occurring during the American spring/summer. In some of these states, such as WI and OH, use of the scooter during the colder months comes with additional challenges: the roads are more slipery and you're more exposed to the elements.

All figures below are in US Dollars.

So what are the economics involved? If the car is kept and the scooter added to the stable, there's an outlay of around $2000-$4500, depending on the model of scooter and local taxes. You may also need to get a motor cycle licence (add in some lessons plus the cost of the test.) For the sake of simplicity, lets say that the new price of super-inflated fuel for your car is $4/gl and the old "ok" pice is $2.50/gl. Some people report spending $80/week (vs $50) with the new prices, for me, it is now around $50 (vs $31.) For those now spending $80, the additional outlay is $1500/year. Given that the price will not go down between now and 2016 (8 years), the simple math is to say $32,000 is the cost of fuel over the that period. If a Vespa can do a week of travelling for $10 where the car is $80, that's a saving of around $3500/year, assmuing that maintenance costs are the same (and they may not be) - see below. Insurance also needs to come into play here, but I have no idea what this will be nor do I have any worthwhile references. To cut to the chase, the $4500 scooter may take upto 2 years to break even in cost effectiveness if the price of fuel remains the same. If the price of gas continues to increase, and there is no reason to suspect it won't, then the time frame for cost recovery comes in. If you can sell the car and live with only a scooter, then the equation shifts dramatically in favour of the scooter. (Corrections made)

But it isn't necessarily a bed of roses either, as one owner in San Francisco has found out, with their blog "Vespa Lx150 total cost of ownership". And lets not forget something else very important - safety.

References:

• High gas prices are driving scooter sales up
• Some are enjoying high gas prices
• ( May 28 2008, 02:52:12 AM PDT ) Permalink Comments [1]

Saturday May 24, 2008

Is America ready for what's coming?

This morning over breakfast, I heard a cook in a restaurant comment that a large container cooking oil had risen in price from around $13 to over $60 and that a bag of flour and risen from $8 to over $30 (if I heard right and a blog post here seems to suggest it's not far wrong.) Last year the minimum wage went up about 12% and this year it is set to do the same ($5.85 (2006) -> $7.25 (2008)) In a recent article in a Nevada newspaper, the state was casting doubts over its wage rise for state workers due to a drop in its revenue - a cost of living increase of 4%. Question is, how would those people make do without it?

What's the root cause? Hard to say. The price of gas is not tipped to drop until at least 2016 as the futures market for oil has already sold supply to that date at current prices. But maybe that is a dream and the more realistic picture is the price of oil is not ever going to go down to where it was. The oil honeymoon is over.

So what has this got to do with the title? America, as a nation, runs on oil. There are a few hold out examples, such as New York City, Washington DC, Chicago, Boston and San Francisco (city area only) that have functional mass transit systems. Expand the view to, for example, the entire San Francisco Bay Area, to places such as Silicon Valley, San Jose, there is barely any worthwhile public transport. Now get out to some of the other populous cities, such as Los Angeles, Las Vegas, etc, there is a bus system that kind of works, but anything else...where's your car man?

It would seem that the basic cost of a lot of things is going to rise this year and next, perhaps pushing many into poverty. But something that cannot be missed is the amount of money that these rises are going to take away from the average person on the street, giving them less discretionary spending. This won't necessarily show up in the US GDP figures, as people will still be spending the same (or more) money but the fraction that goes to transport and food will increase, meaning something else will have to give.

A shift away from driving (too expensive) and maybe smaller portions of food (keeping cost dost.) Is America ready for that? Or will it go for the same size food portions, albeit more expensive, and find more fuel efficient vehicles and keep on polluting?

For further reading:

• The Market Begins to Believe in Peak Oil
• Why Crude Oil price is zooming
• FACTS ON POLICY: Consumer Spending

Saturday March 08, 2008

This Republican Government Supports Torture

In the week just past, the Congress of the United States approved a bill that would ban the practice of "water boarding" as it set guidelines for how the CIA is allowed to interrogate people.

As a show of support for what Congress and the people of the United States of America want, the President of the United States, George Bush, promptly veoted the bill, saying that it would make it harder for the CIA and others to collect information. Or to put it simply, the current President of the United States supports the torture of people in order to get them to speak.

When combatting people, such as terrorists (or bullies) who adopt low standards in order to achieve their outcomes, the challenge is not to sink to their level in order to face them in combat for doing so gives them victory without a punch even being thrown.

Congratulations America, you've got a President who wants to drag your country back to the middle ages.

In November this year, the American people will be asked to vote for which party they want to lead the country. Lets hope that they can choose a party that respects human life and is in concert with what others around the world expect and believe on important issues such as this.

Bush Vetoes Bill Baning Waterboarding

Saturday January 26, 2008

Why People Believe Americans Are Stupid

Fresh from trying to get into the APEC, Chaser went to the USA and interviewed random Americans... occassionally there was a glimmer of intelligence but on the whole, it wasn't very convincing.

To be fair, I can imagine there would be parts of Australia (and most likely other "modern" countries (such as England)) where there was a similar level of ignorance of world events, but no other "modern" country goes to the lengths that America does to assert how good it is.

Video clip: Why People Believe Americans Are Stupid.

Sunday November 11, 2007

Owning your mailbox

In the USA, the US Postal Service (USPS) has juristiction over your mailbox. Or in other words, nobody but the USPS can place items in your mailbox and because all junk mail is paid for and delivered by the USPS, you cannot refuse to have it placed in your mailbox. Moving to the USA from a country where the industry self regulated itself to avoid annoying customers, this is incredibly infuriating.

A summary of the current state of who allows what can be found here: Current national and international arrangements (from NSW, Australia.) Denmark seems to be leading the way, but will we ever see anything like that in the USA or elsewhere?

A more in depth summary of the problem in the USA can be found at http://www.ecofuture.org/jmusps.html. Two out of three reasons for allowing the USPS to deliver junk mail involve money. Clearly if the USPS needs this type of business to stay alive then there is a serious problem with the business model being used for the USPS as other countries do not seem to have this problem.

One very real problem with the current arrangement in the USA, with respect to bulk mailings, is that the company printing the material receives no feedback with respect to how much of their material goes straight into the rubbish bin and thus they're unable to match the amount of material they print to the amount that actually gets consumed, resulting in lots of waste. But large quantities of anything and everything, accompanied with waste, defines the USA, doesn't it?

Tuesday April 17, 2007

How much is your SSN worth?

In the USA, the Social Security Number (SSN) is often the key to many organisations offering you some sort of service - especially where the service involves you making payments to them over a period of time.

For those who value their privacy and wish not to give out their SSN, this can be a limiting factor in the organisations with which they deal with, however, some are willing to waive that requirement if you pay some sort of fee up front.

The use of an up front fee (or bond) implicitly gives your privacy/SSN a value. How much is it? So far I have two cases to compare:

• satellite tv - $300
• mobile/cell phone contract - $500

What is your experience? Have you ever tried to obtain a service without divulging your SSN and been told that will cost you $X? How much would you pay to protect your privacy and not have to divulge your SSN?

Saturday October 28, 2006

Martial Law in the USA

Back in 1989, the world watched on, apalled, at the actions of the military of the world's most populous nation as it tried to end the days of protest by university students in the nation's capital.

This last week, what claims to be the world's most free nation, the democratic USA, put itself in a position to repeat those scenes. The event that made this possible was George Bush signing into law that he is alloewd to declare Martial Law.

So while every says that China should become a democracy with free speach and free religion, faster than that is happening, the USA is becoming more like China. How long before the only religion tolerated in the USA is Christianity? What will it take, another President like GWB who claims to have had God speak to him?

These here are dark days....and maybe even darker lay ahead if others around the world follow this lead.

Saturday September 02, 2006

Bill payment systems

In the USA, a suprisingly large number of bills need to be paid by cheque (not check) and even large utilities like PG&E are unable to accept bill payments vis the Internet using credit cards, rather they need bank account information to deduct the money from.

Come on guys...this is the 21st century...get with the program and make it easy for your customers to pay their bills (electronic or otherwise) using whatever form of payment is convenient for the customer. Disclosing bank account details feels very bad to me.

Even with bank account details PG&E claim it will take 3 days to process the payment. Wow. What are they doing, printing out the details you submit electronically, sending them to your bank and then the bank verifies the cheque? Come on! You can be more efficient than this!

Maybe in Australia I got spoilt - paying utilities by credit card and be able to verify the next day that the payment had been made - electronically of course.

But then maybe things in the USA are structured around the concept of pork barelling, where rather than try and run the leanest, meanest and most competitive operation, utilities continue to be fat pigs that are inefficient and lazy?

I wonder how companies like PG&E would change if you could pick up the phone and call Sierra-Pacific Power or Southern California Edison and say "I want you to be electricity provider, starting tomorrow."

Saturday May 20, 2006

Voter registration in CA

So I'm filling out my DMV form, here in CA, and I come to a section that says VOTER REGISTRATION. What the heck? Since when has voting had anything to do with driving?

Over the page, I find the voter registration form and it is then that I see something truely horrifying - a section for you to nominate your party, oh, and one out of the 8 squares says "I decline".

Doesn't anyone realise that even attempting to collect this kind of information, on the kind of scale that this represents, is dangerous? Why does the DMV care at all whether or not you vote? Not only should this question not exist, but this whole form belongs somewhere else.

It is one thing for each party to have a list of its own members or registered voters, but it is alltogether completely different for a government body to even attempt to collect this kind of information. But when the time comes for them to ask people to line up against the wall, they will know which doors to start knocking on...

Wednesday May 10, 2006

The lack of privacy with health insurance

Today I visited a health care provider that wasn't the original doctor I visited some time ago. And while discussing paying for things, they were able to tell me exactly how much money I had left in the "deductible" column. It wasn't until I left that this sank home but why are they entitled to know that? How is the business of any particular health care provider to know what I've spent (or haven't spent) on health care in any given year? All of a sudden I feel violated, as if my health (or lack thereof) is somehow public knowledge.

To compare this with Australia, health care providers have no knowledge about whether you have health insurance and if you do, they have no access to that knowledge. If I want a refund for health care provided, it is up to me to file the appropriate paperwork with the health insurance people. Or, in more modern facilities, I give them a card to swipe (much like an ATM card) and the deduction from the payment is made automatically. At no point does a dentist or doctor or anyone else get told how much I've already spent elsewhere.

Which brings me to another point. To the best of my knowledge, there is no such thing as a "deductible" with health insurance providers in Australia. You're not required to spend $X before you can claim anything, rather the amount you're eligable to deduct from any payment (starting at day 0) is determined by your policy and existing claims to date.

That the same treatment I was looking into, today, in the USA, is twice as expensive in Australia, I'm having second thoughts about the whole thing.

Wednesday March 22, 2006

Keep your Social Security Number Private!

So during my time here in the USA, I'm running into numerous people who want my Social Security Number. Of course, being a new immigrant, I don't yet have one. Is this a problem?

In short, no.

The longer answer is, I am required to divulge it to at least two parties: my employer, the company that holds my bank accounts and to get a drivers licence. I'm not required to divulge my SS# to anyone else.

What about credit card companies? I now have two credit cards, one a Mastercard and one an American Express. Why should they give me a credit card without a social security number? Well, do they want my business or not? In the case of Amex, it appears like I've managed to sign up at a time when they are promoting a new card and of course they're eager to get new people signed up, right?

Most other entities want your SS# for the purpose of determining "who you are" - i.e identification. There are many other suitable ways that you should be able to present suitable identification, namely:

• driver's licence
• passport
• birth certificate

A birth certificate can be found lacking because it is unlikely to have a relevant photo attached, whereas the other two do.

Maybe it isn't quite so easy for Americans to refuse to give out your SS#, but the use of the SS# in the manner it is used today is plain wrong.

So what do we do in Australia?

In Australia we have a Tax File Number. When they mention "Financial Institution", they are referring to banks, not companies like American Express that only issue credit cards. Nobody else gets it. The tax file number is mailed to you on paper. There is no plastic card with it - i.e. you do not keep it in your wallet but at home, locked away somewhere. If you apply for a credit card at a major department store, you do not hand it over as a means of identification. It is not uncommon, however, to be required to provide the following for the purpose of establishing your identity:

• drivers licence or passport
• other credit card or pay slip
• bill for power/water/phone that connects you to your address

For government health benefits, we have a Medicare Card. This is availble to all Australians when they reach the age of 16. It has no other purpose than to serve as an additional means of proving that the name on the card is an Australian citizen.

Due to the obvious limitations with this card, there have been suggestions in the past on a national identity card. In the 1980s and again in the last 12 months. The most recent excuse? to fight terrorism. Luckily the Australian public isn't taking this load of horse manure laying down and recognises it for what it really is and are being vocal in opposition to it.

Thursday March 09, 2006

Directions for driving

In Australia, if you've got a car then unless you're a tourist, you'll have a street directory (or road atlas) in your car. Depending on what city you're in and what your personal preference is, it'll either be a Melways or UBD. In Melbourne, everyone uses Melways and their layout was (in the past) so superior to UBD that UBD changed theirs during the 1990s from the tourist-style "hollow" roads to map-style solid lines to mimic Melways. If you were going someplace, you'd either be given a Melways reference to start with (not uncommon on party, wedding, etc invitations) or lookup the street in the index and find a path through the maps. This can be quite a chore, depending on where you're going to/from but it is part of your training to be a driver.

If you ask someone in the USA if they've got a street directory, you'll most likely get a blank look. If you mention road atlas, you might get a nod of understanding but still a questioning look. How do Americans ever get where they're going, you might wonder? At least two that I'm familiar with.

1. Visit AAA and acquire a collection of maps;

2. Use a website to get directions from "here" to "there".

Increasingly more people use (2) and indeed, at first bite it seems quite useful, that is so long as everything is perfect. When aren't things perfect? When, for example, someone decides to dig up the road and you're forced to take a detour. Another example is the directions say "turn left", but the intersection you're turning at is not a "simple intersection" and the map that you printed out doesn't have enough detailed information to tell you which one is right. You're also not well equipped to discover alternative routes if you get stuck in heavy traffic, etc. Having a road atlas when travelling on highways has given me the power to turn off, rather than crawl along, and take much less crowded roads for a much nicer driving experience.

Just to round this out, my experience with using (1) is that the maps are often not as accurate as I'm used to with Melways when it comes to both presence of roads and their condition - paved vs graded (for example.)

Friday March 03, 2006

Driving in the San Francisco Bay Area

This has been a long time coming, but where do all the drivers here get their licenses and who lets them drive?

Half of the drivers here don't seem to understand that indicators are to be used while driving, not just when stationary in the emergency lane. The really disconcerting part of this is when they fail to use them to change lanes on a freeway, you're never really sure if they know you're there or not, or if they're deliberately sliding over into your lane or just getting ready to slam into the wall by the side of the road!

As if this weren't bad enough, there are too many drivers that don't know how to enter a freeway. I've seen drivers "stop" at the bottom of an on-ramp and wait for a gap to merge into the traffic. Instructors of drivers and people doing driving tests should be making a point of people knowing that when possible, you should try to match the speed of the traffic on the freeway when it is time to merge. Yes, it isn't always possible, but it is a heck of a lot easier but does require you to look at the freeway traffic coming in your direction before you get to the actual join. Is that too hard?

Unfortunately I suspect that a large number of the "freeway merge" problems in SFBA are highway 101 specific. Why? It has too many exits and entrances and they're too close together. So much so that it's almost not either a highway or a freeway but just a major road without traffic lights. Cloverleafs, on ramps, off ramps, freeway joins and sometimes both happening all within a few hundred yards of each other. Add to this a whole lot of cars trying to go every which way and there you have it.