The Unretired

Business Week magazine, in the December 15, 2008 issue (page 46), has an article on The Unretired. These are people who retired, but due to the economic downturn are now hurting financially, and in many cases going back to work.

A couple of quotes, just a few paragraphs apart, stood out to me:

These aren't just the spendthrifts or sloppy planners you would expect to run into trouble in retirement ... many are people who did everything they were supposed to do -- working for decades and regularly socking money away.

Peter Fay, like many of The Unretired, feels angry and betrayed. The 63-year-old built up a $1 million retirement account as an executive at companies including Chiquita Brands International and then at his own high-end flooring company in Scottsdale, Ariz. But with all his money in stocks, he's lost 50% of that this year, at the same time that his house has tumbled in value. He's drawing down his savings and applying for jobs at Lowe's, Home Depot, and Costco. "All the systems we grew up trusting during all those years of work -- you save your money, you trust in the government -- are no longer valid," he says.

Did you catch that? "all his money in stocks" This is doing "what they were supposed to do?" I know of NO reputable financial planner or advisor who would recommend a retiree (or near-retiree) have all his money in stocks, even in the heady days of the market of the last few years.

Quite the opposite. He (and/or his financial advisors) were apparently driven by pure greed. If history can't teach people that greed is ultimately bad for them, nothing will, I suppose.

The cost of college sports

I'm all in favor of co-curricular activities. Students need to be involved in sports, or music, or drama, or other activities outside their area of study in order to be well-rounded. For some students, it is the co-curricular activities that keep them in school. But I think the sense of proportion goes right out the window when it comes to college sports, and in particular college football.

Here are some interesting numbers from the December 2008 / January 2009 issue of Fast Company magazine (page 48):

-- The college football economy is worth an estimated yearly $6,000,000,000. (Yes, that's six billion dollars!)
-- Ohio State University had the nation's largest athletic budget last year: $109,382,222. That's nearly $110,000 for each of it's 980 athletes. (Except that when I do the math, I get $111,614.51 per athlete!)
-- Fox paid $330,000,000 to air all Bowl Championship Series games except the Rose Bowl from 2007-2010.
-- WINS: Merchandise royalties for the University of Texas doubled to $8,000,000 after it won the 2006 national championship.
-- LOSSES: NBC Pays $9,000,000 per year for the broadcast rights to home games at Notre Dame, which went 3-9 last season. Ratings have dropped 47% since 2005.
-- New Orleans got an economic boost estimated at $400,000,000 from hosting last year's national championship.
-- The 619 schools competing in NCAA football in 2007 tallied total attendance of 48,751,861.
-- Last season's 32 bowl games collectively drew 1,700,000 fans. Another 129,000,000 households tuned in to TV broadcasts.
-- Average home-game attendance in 2007 at Texas A&M's Kyle field: 82,207.
Estimated population in 2007 of College Station, Texas, home to Texas A&M: 80,315.

Thoughts on the election

Now that B. Hussein Obama has completed his purchase of the Presidency, a few thoughts.

I was on the campus of William Jewell College yesterday. Melissa says that there must be a budget line-item in the Obama campaign's books for sidewalk chalk. Sure enough, every few feet on all the sidewalks I was on, there was another "Vote Obama" message. One said, "Want more green cars on the road?" Another, "Worried about finding a job?" And another said, "Want affordable healthcare? Vote Obama."

The problem is, that few people (and least of all college students) stop to consider the cost of those options. Putting more green cars on the road, giving people jobs, paying for healthcare ... they all seem like good ideas, but they all have a cost. By conveniently ignoring the cost, the tax-and-spenders can buy votes with promises of things, and the voters just eat it up and march in lockstep to the polls.

In some ways, the cut-taxes-and-spend crowd is worse, because they want to buy your vote from both ends: What you'll get, and it will even cost less. Every politician tells us they want to cut out the porkbarrel spending, but it's those very porky projects that buy re-election votes. If a Congressperson truly turned down everything of a porcine nature for the home state, he or she would be out of a job come the next election, no question about it.

But giving people who won't work a bunch of freebies paid for by those who will is precisely the wrong way to build or sustain a great nation. It encourages mediocrity, or worse. When asked, "What is wrong with the redistribution of wealth, which Obama talked about as far back as a 2001 interview?", Senator McCain said it very well:

That is a bold, left-wing view of how you help people that's been tried in other countries. In America, you don't take money from one group and give it to another. You create jobs, create opportunities, and give people the ability to accumulate wealth. We have Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance. But to somehow say that when "Joe the Plumber" reaches a certain income level, we're going to take money from him and give it to somebody else, that's a fundamental contradiction of what made this country the strongest and greatest nation in the world.
Business Week November 10, 2008, p.20

Is there any hope for more nuclear power in the US?

Is there any hope for more nuclear power in the US? Probably not, as long as the news outlets are so biased against it.

Exhibit A:
Headline on CNNMoney website: "Nuclear Plant Shutdown Causes Massive Florida Power Outages"
Excerpt from the actual story: "A problem with the electrical grid in Florida caused power outages stretching from Miami up almost to Jacksonville that affected as many as 3 million people Tuesday and caused a nuclear plant to automatically shut down ..."
Truth: A problem outside the nuclear generating facility caused instability in the electric grid, so the power plant shut down (safely) as a precaution. The headline doesn't just give the impression that the plant was at fault, it blatantly says so.

The fact is that most Americans have an irrational fear of nuclear power. The amount of radiation release in the Three Mile Island incident was less than is released in the average chest X-ray. And Chernobyl ... well, that reactor was not built to any reasonable safety standard. The reactor building was not even encased in concrete. FAR more radiation occurred in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania from the Chernobyl incident than from the one at Three Mile Island.

And here's something I didn't know: One big concern with nuclear power is the waste. Fortunately, most of the waste can be recycled and used for medical and other beneficial uses. France, which generates a huge percentage of it's power with nuclear plants, stores all of it's waste in a small room. We can't do that in the USA thanks to Jimmy Carter. He was concerned that terrorists and other countries might use waste to make bombs, so he outlawed ALL recycling of nuclear waste. Didn't make any difference. The bad guys have found many cheaper sources of what they want.

Until laws and attitudes change, we have little hope for the inexpensive, clean and safe power that the nuclear option offers.

There's an EXCELLENT article in this month's Imprimis magazine on the future of nuclear power in the USA. Well worth the 5 minutes or so it takes to read it.

Nancy Boyda spouts off again

An article in today's Topeka Capital-Journal tells how the National Guard at Forbes Field in Topeka has a dozen old jet airplanes (they'll turn 50 years old next month) that nobody flies anymore. In fact, there's nobody certified to fly the planes. They have been superseded by newer planes, and they're in the way. Unfortunately, an obscure little phrase in an old Federal law that will not allow the planes to be decommissioned without Congressional approval. As if that's not bad enough, the law requires that these planes be maintained, so somebody has to go out every week and start them up and tow them around so the tires don't get flat spots. The National Guard estimates that it costs $1.1 million a year to do this. And it's the same story at many other bases in the country. Total hit to our taxpayer wallets: $229 million annually.

Here's the article (at least until the C-J takes it down).

Enter Nancy Boyda. She says she wants to get that law off the books, and I have to agree with her (There's a first time for everything!). Her quote:

I believe that military leaders, not politicians, should decide when equipment has become hopelessly outdated.

One has to wonder if she believes that military leaders and not politicians should decide on the best course of action in Iraq?

I'd give a left lugnut to see her face if someone asked her that!

Another venerable institution loses it's luster

It was bad enough when Focus on the Family's Dr. Dobson announced that he's willing to let radical liberals like those supported by moveon.org run our country. My respect for the man and the institution he built has moved down from 100% for the first time ever.

Now, hard on the heels of that shocker comes word that Al Gore is one of the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize. What Gore's work has to do with peace is beyond me. What his work has to do with truth is an even deeper mystery.

The Nobel Peace Prize committee has made some stupid blunders in it's history, but this ranks right down there with the worst.

What is this world coming to?

The real betrayers

Those foaming-at-the-mouth whiners at moveon.org published a newspaper ad the other day calling General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General of the Multi-National Foce-Iraq, "General Betray-us". They basically accused him of lying. More than that, they implicitly accused the whole military of lying. President Bush, for all his faults, called this one correctly when he said it was "disgusting". Agree with the President or the Democrats, agree with the war or disagree ... there's no reason to call into question the integrity or honesty of our military leaders without cause. Just because what they report isn't what you want to hear doesn't make them dishonest.

So, today, the US Senate considered an amendment to a bill. That amendment was "To express the sense of the Senate that [Petraeus] deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces." Pretty cut-and-dried, right? Doesn't matter which side of the debate you fall on, surely you could support this one, right? Anyone who doesn't agree with this one is a traitor to the United States of America, right?

OK, here's the list, in all it's glory:

Akaka, Hawaii
Bingaman, New Mexico
Boxer, California
Brown, Ohio
Byrd, West Virginia
Clinton, New York
Dodd, Connecticut
Durbin, Illinois
Feingold, Wisconsin
Harkin, Iowa
Inouye, Hawaii
Kennedy, Massachusetts
Kerry, Massachusetts
Lautenberg, New Jersey
Levin, Michigan
Menendez, New Jersey
Murray, Washington
Reed, Rhode Island
Reid, Nevada
Rockefeller, West Virginia
Sanders, Vermont
Schumer, New York
Stabenow, Michigan
Whitehouse, Rhode Island
Wyden, Oregon

Notice the names of a few candidates for President in that list of traitors? Now, here's the real kicker: Mr. Biden of Delaware and Mr. Obama of Illinois simply failed to vote. They knew they couldn't go on record voting against this amendment, but they are so under the thumb of moveon.org that they couldn't vote for it. So skipping the vote saves their political careers for both the election and for the rabid left-wingnuts.

My respect for Ms. Clinton couldn't get any lower (except for that respect I have for a mastermind of crime ... how does she manage to get away with it, time after time?). But any shred of respect I had for the others on that list (Obama and Biden included) is now gone.

Innumeracy, part 2

Today's Wamego Smoke Signal has an interesting factoid on the front page:

Did you know Kansas produces 68 percent of the world's cattle? We are the second highest producer in the world; Texas came in first.

This is wrong in a couple of ways. The first is obvious, and I'm surprised that the reporter (or at least the Editor) didn't catch it. If you produce 68 percent of something, you cannot be the second largest producer. In fact, if you produce even the tiniest fraction over 50 percent of something, you're guaranteed to be the biggest producer of that thing. Second, I just don't see how it's possible for Kansas to produce 68 percent of the world's cattle. I'll admit we have a lot of them here, but just think of how many are in Nebraska, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, California, and a whole lot of other states. Then start thinking about how many are in all the other countries of the world.

If the article had said we produce even 6.8 percent of the world's cattle, I might have done a double-take, but I wouldn't have doubted it too long. That is on the order of a number that strikes me as reasonable ... and yet it's still somewhat larger than I might have expected.

The name of the reporter is a new one for the Smoke Signal, so let's give her the benefit of the doubt. She's probably very new to the job, fresh out of school, and not particularly polished at the art of taking notes at a meeting and then writing a story later. I hope she learns from her mistake. At the very least, Melissa took the paper to her Newspaper class at the High School today, so her fellow journalists could learn from it.

Update: According to the USDA Economic Research Service website, in 2006, Kansas produced $6.25 billion in Cattle and calves. This is 60.4 percent of the state's total receipts from agriculture, and 12.7 percent of the nation's. Our distant second most profitable agricultural activity was Wheat ($1.27 billion) followed by Corn, Soybeans and Hogs. As far as exports, Wheat was number 1 ($912 million), and we were number 1 in the nation in that commodity.

I knew it!

Sometimes I think I'm the only person in the world who doesn't like popcorn. It's mostly the smell, I think. Especially the microwave stuff. I always thought that the fumes from that were toxic, and now I have proof!

Read about the toxic fumes here!

Innumeracy

Over the lunch hour, I heard an old song (1986) on the radio. It is by Wang Chung, and it's called "Everybody Have Fun Tonight".

In the first line of the song, the lyrics say, "I'd drive a million miles to be with you tonight." It's a nice sentiment, but let's look at the reality.

Assume you could average 60 miles an hour. That's driving 75mph or more, with occasional breaks. A million miles at that speed would take a million minutes, which is 16,667 hours. Even driving 16 hours a day, that would take over 1041 days, or the better part of 3 years.

Love (lust?) is blind, and sometimes innumerate.

Whither the Environmentalists?

While I was enjoying the fireworks last Wednesday, I noticed how much smoke was in the air. It occured to me that the people of Wamego probably produced more air pollution in the first few days of July than they do during the entire remainder of the year. Perhaps not quite that much, but certainly there was a lot of it. Multiply that by cities and towns all over the country, and our pollution/particulate footprint for those few days was enormous.

Where were the environmentalists who are usually crying on TV about how dangerous humans are to the planet? Where was Al Gore -- watching fireworks somewhere?

Stupidest Bumper Stickers

Here are my nominations for the stupidest bumper stickers, along with my comments.

"You cannot simultaneously prepare for war and prevent it." Actually, any country which values it's freedoms MUST simultaneously prepare for war while working diligently to prevent it.

"If you can't trust me with a choice, how can you trust me with a child?" I'm sorry, but if your choice would be to destroy that child (born or unborn), we (as a society) cannot trust you with either the choice or the child, I'm afraid.

I'm sure there will be more. Stay tuned.

Gesundheit!

Am I the only person who objects to the practice of saying "Gesundheit!" or "Bless You!" when someone sneezes?

This common response to a sneeze is rooted in superstition. At one time, people believed that life was escaping through the nose, the soul was thrown out of the body during the sneeze and was susceptible to capture by Satan, or perhaps that the body was trying to cast off a demon in a sneeze. These ideas are patently absurd, and yet the blessing to ward off such events is still repeated.

Of the two, however, "Gesundheit" is marginally acceptable, since it translates more or less as "to your good health". Wishing someone who suffers from a cold or allergies "good health" is a pleasant thing to do, and I guess it doesn't matter that it's done in German.

But saying "Bless You!" after someone sneezes is just silly. Stop it!

On honesty

At a fast food place the other day, the guy ahead of me ordered water. The cup he was given is different from all the other cups, so I know that's what he ordered. When I got my food, I went over to the drink dispensers, and there he was, filling his "water" cup with Dr. Pepper.
In a small way, it's just the same as insurance fraud or lawsuit abuse. The big problem is that it raises the price of everything for everyone. One little cup of Dr. Pepper isn't going to break the restaurant, and that's certainly how his thinking went. But multiply it by a few thousand people across the chain, and it adds up to a "shrinkage" line on the books that has to be covered.
The one time our house was broken into, we ended up with nothing missing. Our TV had been disconnected, and was sitting in the middle of the living room floor, like the crooks had intended to take it. In a way, I wish they had. It was old, it was not working well, and we ended up replacing it within a few months of the break-in. Someone joked that I should have hauled it to the landfill and reported it as missing to the insurance company. At least I hope he was joking. Any time something is taken and not paid for, whenever an expense report is padded, any time an insurance claim is added to ... we all pay.
Come to think of it, we all pay in more ways than just the cost of the shrinkage, too. Have you seen the number of security cameras at the new Wal-Mart store? I once counted. When I'm in the parking lot, I can see 21 security cameras from one spot. And inside, there must be hundreds. It makes the place look like a prison. (And feel like one, too. Whenever I go in, I want to drag a tin cup across a set of bars, and yell "Let me out of here!") We've all paid for the cost of those cameras, their installation, and the salaries of all the people it takes to watch them. Every measure that has to be taken to prevent shrinkage and fraud costs us all money, too.
Just another rant about something I can't do anything about. Have a good Monday.