Since when has it become legal for our public servants, namely the police and EMTs from the fire department, to break the anti-littering ordinance? I live in Nashville, Tennessee, and it is almost a daily occurrence (in my life...) to find strewn along the highways and city streets, disposable plastic gloves...you know, the kind the doctor uses to examine you. (If you don't believe me, I have photographic proof. Send me an email, and I'll send you several photographs.) They are usually at the scene of an arrest or a traffic accident, and usually, in pairs. Some are white or off-white, but most of them these days are purple or turquoise. Now don't get me wrong, I appreciate the work our police do. They encounter all kinds of people, and need the protection of these gloves to keep from becoming victims of the potentially diseased interrogants. AIDS is still incurable, and very deadly. But littering is still against the law...and these folks are sworn to uphold that law.
Would it be too difficult to put a trash bag in the trunk of the patrol car, and when finished with the gloves, simply put them in the bag? Rules are rules, and these public servants cannot legitimately enforce a law which they themselves break regularly. If they are not guilty, then none of us are. Let's clean up our act.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Friday, November 18, 2011
Chemical Independence
Chemical Independence
Isn't it wonderful, what science has done for us?
They have come up with chemicals to cover up the unpleasant
odors of everyday living. Isn't that wonderful?!?
On first impression, yes...very. But, upon further examination,
we need to NOT use those chemicals. Here's my reasoning why:
1. The chemicals mask good odors. We never use our sense
of smell to detect possible pleasantness.
2. The chemicals mask bad odors. We learn to not use our
sense of smell to detect unpleasantness.
3. The chemicals mask potentially dangerous or fatal odors. Again,
we learn to not smell danger.
In this ever-changing world, danger looms at every corner.
One of the ways we, and all of our fellow animal occupants of planet
Earth, have managed to survive and even thrive is by using our senses
to detect and protect. We detect danger when we smell smoke, or
foul odors, even putrid food.
When we smell smoke, we look for the source, almost invariably,
a fire. Fire is a natural enemy.
Another natural enemy is the bacterium, so small that it evades
our eyesight. When these bacteria invade a food source, spoilage
occurs. Food that is spoiled is unpleasant to smell. We don't like
this smell, and that is an inbred, natural instinct. It is self-preservation
at work. If we do not smell this odor, we assume the food is safe to
eat...not always the case. Especially if the food has been treated with
a masking chemical. It's kinda like a sneaky lie.
Natural gas. Yes, natural gas is an enemy. In its purest form,
it HAS no odor. They (yeah, scientists) solved that problem by
coloring the natural gas with an unpleasant, distinct odor. We have
learned to detect natural gas by that odor. But with those chemicals,
covering an unpleasant odor of natural gas is a snap. I don't know
of anyone dying from natural gas that has had the odor masked, but
it can and will happen.
Predators. Yes, predators. Not the kind that prey on little
children or women...the kind that will eat you. We are animals.
Animals eat other animals. Other animals eat us. Sometimes, they
are big, like tigers or alligators. Sometimes, they are small, like
rats or roaches, even bacteria. It makes no difference. We are all
going to be eaten. Predators all have distinct odors. The native
Americans were able to smell the buffalo or other animals they
were hunting. They were able to feed themselves because of
their sense of smell. We have trained ourselves to not smell.
We have progressed so far that we shall soon see
extinction if we continue to undo nature's safeguards. We need
to learn to use them as they were intended, not disable them.
Isn't it wonderful, what science has done for us?
They have come up with chemicals to cover up the unpleasant
odors of everyday living. Isn't that wonderful?!?
On first impression, yes...very. But, upon further examination,
we need to NOT use those chemicals. Here's my reasoning why:
1. The chemicals mask good odors. We never use our sense
of smell to detect possible pleasantness.
2. The chemicals mask bad odors. We learn to not use our
sense of smell to detect unpleasantness.
3. The chemicals mask potentially dangerous or fatal odors. Again,
we learn to not smell danger.
In this ever-changing world, danger looms at every corner.
One of the ways we, and all of our fellow animal occupants of planet
Earth, have managed to survive and even thrive is by using our senses
to detect and protect. We detect danger when we smell smoke, or
foul odors, even putrid food.
When we smell smoke, we look for the source, almost invariably,
a fire. Fire is a natural enemy.
Another natural enemy is the bacterium, so small that it evades
our eyesight. When these bacteria invade a food source, spoilage
occurs. Food that is spoiled is unpleasant to smell. We don't like
this smell, and that is an inbred, natural instinct. It is self-preservation
at work. If we do not smell this odor, we assume the food is safe to
eat...not always the case. Especially if the food has been treated with
a masking chemical. It's kinda like a sneaky lie.
Natural gas. Yes, natural gas is an enemy. In its purest form,
it HAS no odor. They (yeah, scientists) solved that problem by
coloring the natural gas with an unpleasant, distinct odor. We have
learned to detect natural gas by that odor. But with those chemicals,
covering an unpleasant odor of natural gas is a snap. I don't know
of anyone dying from natural gas that has had the odor masked, but
it can and will happen.
Predators. Yes, predators. Not the kind that prey on little
children or women...the kind that will eat you. We are animals.
Animals eat other animals. Other animals eat us. Sometimes, they
are big, like tigers or alligators. Sometimes, they are small, like
rats or roaches, even bacteria. It makes no difference. We are all
going to be eaten. Predators all have distinct odors. The native
Americans were able to smell the buffalo or other animals they
were hunting. They were able to feed themselves because of
their sense of smell. We have trained ourselves to not smell.
We have progressed so far that we shall soon see
extinction if we continue to undo nature's safeguards. We need
to learn to use them as they were intended, not disable them.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
The Biggest Losers
I feel cheated.
I have been watching television for the past fifty years.
During that time, I have been led to believe that when I got to the age
I am today, there would be shows I would enjoy watching, much as
the shows my father and mother enjoyed when I went to bed as a child.
Shows like "Gunsmoke" or "Bonanza", or "Perry Mason". Now here I
am, fifty years later, and the great television "wasteland" has indeed become
just that...a wasteland. Or to use a painfully obvious pun, waist-land. It seems
that America has evolved as a nation. Where we were once sveldt, slim folks,
with an occasional fatty with a hormonal disease, now we are gross, fat slobs.
We eat until we cannot eat any more, and then go for dessert. After we have
gorged ourselves into grotesque caricatures of our former selves, we spurn
pitying looks and insist that we are entitled to even larger presences; we are
so fat as a nation, that there is an over-abundance of potential contestants for
a television show...no, a television series about fat people losing weight. With
such a clever title, how could we possibly resist watching, right? WRONG.
I am the Biggest Loser.
You are the Biggest Loser.
We all have lost the entertainment value of television, as it makes bigger and
bigger stars of people who didn't have the self respect and common sense to
control their diets in the first place. These people are not stars. They are
(pardon this pun) really losers. They ate and ate, and when they had done so
much damage to themselves that their lives were seriously in danger, they
found that our society would actually cheer them on for doing something they
should have done for themselves anyway.
And throw money and fame at them.
I have been watching television for the past fifty years.
During that time, I have been led to believe that when I got to the age
I am today, there would be shows I would enjoy watching, much as
the shows my father and mother enjoyed when I went to bed as a child.
Shows like "Gunsmoke" or "Bonanza", or "Perry Mason". Now here I
am, fifty years later, and the great television "wasteland" has indeed become
just that...a wasteland. Or to use a painfully obvious pun, waist-land. It seems
that America has evolved as a nation. Where we were once sveldt, slim folks,
with an occasional fatty with a hormonal disease, now we are gross, fat slobs.
We eat until we cannot eat any more, and then go for dessert. After we have
gorged ourselves into grotesque caricatures of our former selves, we spurn
pitying looks and insist that we are entitled to even larger presences; we are
so fat as a nation, that there is an over-abundance of potential contestants for
a television show...no, a television series about fat people losing weight. With
such a clever title, how could we possibly resist watching, right? WRONG.
I am the Biggest Loser.
You are the Biggest Loser.
We all have lost the entertainment value of television, as it makes bigger and
bigger stars of people who didn't have the self respect and common sense to
control their diets in the first place. These people are not stars. They are
(pardon this pun) really losers. They ate and ate, and when they had done so
much damage to themselves that their lives were seriously in danger, they
found that our society would actually cheer them on for doing something they
should have done for themselves anyway.
And throw money and fame at them.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Electric Cars and the Gasoline Tax
I have a suggestion to make sure that electric vehicles contribute to the upkeep of the roadway system.
re: Electric cars, a proposed use tax for upkeep of roads.
The reason for this tax is to fund the upkeep and to reimburse the government for the usage of the roadways. Conventional gasoline-powered vehicles pay for the roads with gasoline taxes, both state and federal. The money is collected at the pump when gasoline is purchased. Since electric cars do not use gasoline, but still use the same roadways, they should be taxed on their projected annual usage of the roadways. A guess-timate of this usage is approximately 12,500 miles per year. Some folks drive more, some less, but an average would be in that ballpark. A calculation of the tax would assume that gasoline-powered cars get 15 miles per gallon, and thus pay tax of $.35 per 15 miles. To put all the figures into the equation:
(12500/15) X .35 = $250.00
This tax could be flat-rated, or, to ensure fairness, send the electric vehicles to the MARTA station annually to check the actual mileage, and calculate the tax. This method would be preferable, since actual usage would be taxed instead of guessed. To ensure that the mileage is accurate, a tamper-proof seal could be dated and placed on the odometer of the electric vehicle. An added advantage to this method is that the vehicles could be monitored for their required safety equipment. The problem of not having a working odometer could be solved by simply using the equation above to tax the vehicle, adding a stiff penalty to encourage compliance and keeping the vehicle in good repair. (To ensure that the owner/operator of the vehicle doesn't cheat or disconnect the odometer)
re: Electric cars, a proposed use tax for upkeep of roads.
The reason for this tax is to fund the upkeep and to reimburse the government for the usage of the roadways. Conventional gasoline-powered vehicles pay for the roads with gasoline taxes, both state and federal. The money is collected at the pump when gasoline is purchased. Since electric cars do not use gasoline, but still use the same roadways, they should be taxed on their projected annual usage of the roadways. A guess-timate of this usage is approximately 12,500 miles per year. Some folks drive more, some less, but an average would be in that ballpark. A calculation of the tax would assume that gasoline-powered cars get 15 miles per gallon, and thus pay tax of $.35 per 15 miles. To put all the figures into the equation:
(12500/15) X .35 = $250.00
This tax could be flat-rated, or, to ensure fairness, send the electric vehicles to the MARTA station annually to check the actual mileage, and calculate the tax. This method would be preferable, since actual usage would be taxed instead of guessed. To ensure that the mileage is accurate, a tamper-proof seal could be dated and placed on the odometer of the electric vehicle. An added advantage to this method is that the vehicles could be monitored for their required safety equipment. The problem of not having a working odometer could be solved by simply using the equation above to tax the vehicle, adding a stiff penalty to encourage compliance and keeping the vehicle in good repair. (To ensure that the owner/operator of the vehicle doesn't cheat or disconnect the odometer)
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Welcome, or should I say, May I be welcomed here...
This is my first post. I've never done this before, and it may be apparent to you, but I didn't read anyone else's blog either. I just signed up and started by the seat of my pants. I think I have what we used to call "common sense", and I've noticed that it is not at all as common as it once was. I just want to make my observations on that demise, and express my opinions about various subjects. You, of course, are free to agree or disagree...that's what makes the United States such a great country to live in. Okay, enough about me and the introductions...on to bigger and riper fish...
My first blog is entitled NO DRUG ADVERTISING
In our daily routines, we are constantly bombarded with entreaties from drug companies to buy or ask our doctors to prescribe many different and, at times, wonderful drugs. Sometimes, the drugs are indicated for the maladies we encounter. Usually, though, they are not. The drug companies give free samples like chum to the fish in a lake, hoping to snag the big ones. They give doctors incentives to prescribe unneeded, sometimes very expensive drugs. They (the companies) advertise, at no small expense, on billboards, radio, internet, and television, attempting to convince us that we are sick and they can cure us.
This practice adds immensely to the consumer cost of these drugs. The extra costs
are then passed on to the consumer as "costs of production", artificially inflating the actual wholesale cost to the manufacturers, who then use these inflated costs to justify charging even higher prices for their products. If we collectively ask our government to restrict these ads, we can all bring down the costs, both to the wholesalers and to the consumers, making the drugs affordable to many more people (assuming that the drugs are actually needed).
My first blog is entitled NO DRUG ADVERTISING
In our daily routines, we are constantly bombarded with entreaties from drug companies to buy or ask our doctors to prescribe many different and, at times, wonderful drugs. Sometimes, the drugs are indicated for the maladies we encounter. Usually, though, they are not. The drug companies give free samples like chum to the fish in a lake, hoping to snag the big ones. They give doctors incentives to prescribe unneeded, sometimes very expensive drugs. They (the companies) advertise, at no small expense, on billboards, radio, internet, and television, attempting to convince us that we are sick and they can cure us.
This practice adds immensely to the consumer cost of these drugs. The extra costs
are then passed on to the consumer as "costs of production", artificially inflating the actual wholesale cost to the manufacturers, who then use these inflated costs to justify charging even higher prices for their products. If we collectively ask our government to restrict these ads, we can all bring down the costs, both to the wholesalers and to the consumers, making the drugs affordable to many more people (assuming that the drugs are actually needed).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)