Sarcasm, Honesty, Objectivity

I just had to copy that article from the newyorktimes.com. What a tradgedy to die, in a stampede of shoppers that had previously been waiting for deals at Walmart. The stores sliding glass doors were shattered and people came flooding in. In the midst of this chaos one poor employee Jdimytai Damour was knocked over and flattened by the trampling crowd. This story is extremely sad, my condolensces to the Damour family. However, this tradgedy could have been adverted. I feel like this is made worse by the fact that neglegence caused this unfortunate event.

This events mishap is two fold. First the police should have been there faster. They were called over an hour before this event actually happened. The police said that they thought that Walmart had hired security plus the mall security (in which they are located in) would be their to help. Little did they know Walmart wasn’t one of those that were covered because they didn’t want to pay for it. Secondly and most importantly it was up to Walmart who knew that in the past rables had grown outside to have staff and security staff present before the onsolaught happened. Its responsibilty that a lot of these companies lack. Walmart even said they didn’t want to comment on the issue but they are sorry for the loss. Unfortuantly due to the nature of riots, no single person can usually be singles out and charged with the assualt but the company that allowed this to happen. To end this this with a quote.

Wal-Mart, in a statement issued at its headquarters in Bentonville, Ark., said: “The safety and security of our customers and associates is our top priority. Our thoughts and prayers are with them and their families at this tragic time.”

Obviously not.

WASHINGTON — The Labor Department is racing to complete a new rule, strenuously opposed by President-elect Barack Obama, that would make it much harder for the government to regulate toxic substances and hazardous chemicals to which workers are exposed on the job.

I really can’t believe that someone would not want to pass a law that makes sure on a global scale that people who work with toxic chemicals would be protected by a government set limit. Of course though,

The rule, which has strong support from business groups, says that in assessing the risk from a particular substance, federal agencies should gather and analyze “industry-by-industry evidence” of employees’ exposure to it during their working lives.

Now, honestly… companies wouldn’t want the government to set a regulation because if they are allowed to they could have whatever standard they deem “Safe” and not catch heat over. If the government does an industry by industry analyzes it could take forever to complete… giving companies more time to make money even if their facility/operation is hazardous to the people working there. Honestly… if a chemical is present and it causes toxic effects over time… a set standard by which no worker could have more than “x” level regardless of what industry by industry approach you take… if the company is doing the right thing then the worker would be safe.

This seems to be a directly their to help big business.

Public health officials and labor unions said the rule would delay needed protections for workers, resulting in additional deaths and illnesses.

Here is what the people say working for these companies. I feel that this is directly against what government is there for… to make sure that people are being fairly treated. It is quite obvious that people who oppose this rule are those who are managing the companies that operate with all the hazardous chemicals while those in favor or those who work there. Isn’t creating a standard to insure the health of the workers more important?

Companies state that it would complicate steps in order to help change health regulations in their companies but leave out the details in how… except that if this action is taken… it may delay proceeds a little and may cause problems in the short term. However, this in my opinion is a long term effect. Toxic exposure can take years to accumulate much like a pilot and radiation levels. I hope that this bill doesn’t pass in the rush before Bush leaves. This is one of those bills that needs a closer look before just passed around and signed.

Recently it has come to my attention that Tesla is asking for government help in developing a new engine power type… or at least the second generation. Their current car goes for a little over 105 thousand dollars… way more than almost anyone could afford. With this being said, the reason why they want this funding is to take part of the governement aid set aside for fixing car related problems to make a new lower cost car. (Taken from newyorktimes.com)

The company is requesting $400 million in low-interest federal loans as part of the $25 billion loan package for the auto industry passed by Congress last year.

They are also getting funding from other outside sources such as private investors and quote

says it will soon receive another round of $40 million from its private investors to sustain operations.

In light of the current big three car company failings it seems that helping a company who has their eyes set on the future and development seems to be a good idea. If they continue to work towards creating an affordable vehicle for consumers to buy with the money they are given, I would see this as a sound investment. The most important thing in this deal is to require them to produce a cost friendly car with their development. If they would comply to do this… I would think consideration to their request needs to be given a good thought.

Tesla says it cannot move forward on plans to bring out a second-generation car, a less expensive sedan seating five, without federal funds. It’s also counting on rapid improvements in the core component of its powertrain — a thousand-pound pack of lithium-ion batteries — but such improvements don’t happen at the pace Tesla needs them to happen.

I hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving day. Tomorrow as we most know is Black Friday marked by history as the day the most companies went from the Red to the black because more than 25% of the whole years worth of profits were sold on that day or closely after. However, there is a bit of a cycle that seems to be the big reason why people go out to shop on Friday… Discounts and Sales… “Doorbusters.” Most companies however are expecting low profits and a bleak outlook on the rest of the season.

Right now however we are engaged in a season of price competition… but not just a little bit of competition we are talking about taking losses to draw in crowds in hopes they may spend more money on other products. Taken from newyorktimes.com

While bargains are already on offer at J. C. Penney, Mr. Hicks said the company’s doorbusters would make it worth lining up before sunrise. Over all, J. C. Penney, which plans to open at 4 a.m., will have 20 percent more specials this year than last year, like a five-piece luggage set for $38.88. “We’re selling some items purely intended to drive that traffic in,” Mr. Hicks said.

Seems kind of iffy to base a whole sale system based upon the hope that people will stay in your store longer when almost everyone else in competition will do the same thing. In other words, coming from someone who has worked retail for many years… if you create a sale like this its to draw people in with a sale that no one else is doing. Other analyst have stating the same thing:

“There’s no reason to suspect this will end,” said Dan de Grandpre, editor in chief of Dealnews.com, which has been tracking Black Friday deals for about a decade. “This kind of heavy discounting will continue until we see some retailers start to fail, until they start to go out of business.”

I hope that the mass discounting is taken into consideration when trying to draw in crowds. The people who are going for the big sales are coming in for certain items and then they move onto the next store and go for that item and so on and so on. I don’t know about you, but I dread shopping, much less doing anything on Black Friday… so I stay put and wait for later that week to do any shopping.

As of recent the best place to be in the job front for success and stability would be the grocery front. The growth of many of the chains and super stores have become the new thing. You don’t go to a mom and pop store… you go to a big multi-spanning department grocery store. You go to places like Target, Walmart and HEB Plus to get everything from furniture to milk to clothing. Everyone has to eat. That is the philosophy  of many grocery chains… convenience is the name of the game when it comes to these big stores. Most people are looking for a fast way to get in and out… why go to three stores if you can go to one and get all your needs taken care of.

With recent declines in other sectors such as electronics and home improvements stores… one of the best places to be seems to be a grocery store. Whats more is the brands people have stood by so loyally for years are falling to the generic store brands.

Penny pinching consumers have helped food retailers increase their sales of store-branded products, whose sales increased 10% in the last year to more than $81 billion, according to the data firm Nielsen Co. Kroger Co. (KR), the largest traditional food retailer in the U.S., reported record sales of its in-store brands in its latest quarter…

More and more consumers who are price conscious even when it comes to purchasing food are now looking at store brands as a way to alleviate many of the price hikes. For instance, coke a year ago at the machine was a dollar, now the vending machines are up to 1.25 to 1.50. In most grocery stores you pay a dollar fifty for a cold coke while the store brand remains 25 to 50 cents. This run to store brands creates more profit for stores. During times of depression everyone needs to eat, so its safe to say your safe at the grocery store.

I am going to interrupt my ongoing series with the car companies to rail on Hospitals and health care information. So recently a friend of mine had a call from the collection agency… claiming she owed 1250.00 USD to them by the 30 of November or they were going to report to the credit agency. Why? Because that was her bill that her insurance didn’t cover (supposedly) from when she broke her toe back in April… that no one told her until now that she owed. No calls from the hospital and no letters in the mail. However, that’s not the point alone… so I was concerned… her appointment went like this. She broke her toe, went into the doctors office… the doctors looked at it… grabbed pulled it in place and wrote a script for a pain reliever. No X-rays, not even the script was filled… $1400. She was told while she was there it would be 150$ up front.

Now I thought this was a bit high. So I went to do some research. I called several Hospitals asking for help. When I got a hold of a help line they wanted all my information and constantly reminded me of rules and regulations about confidentiality… So I had to pretend it was my injury. It boiled down to this. No one could tell me how much anything costed. Not even a ball-park not even an estimate. I called their billing services and they basically told me it was case by case… understandable… but a broken toe isn’t life threatening and there has to be a break down somewhere.

Four hospitals later and dealing with some of the most rude people on the phone I have ever…EVER… talked to. They were more concerned with following protocol for something as simple as a broken toe. In fact I had one hang up on me, telling me,

“Sir, go to a Doctor I don’t have any prices here. Do you need help or not? If so, go to your Doctor… (click.)”

“I have no idea, they don’t tell us that here. This is a help line, not a pricing line.”

“Look do you need help, or financing? If so call our billing offices.

Me: Do you know the number?

Them: No use whatever you used to find this number and call them.”

Seriously? On the fourth attempt I finally got someone to tell me an idea of how much it should cost… but that was after some serious heckling and over ten minutes on the phone. The problem in this is the way healthcare is being handled… once you get help your stuck. There isn’t any upfront or would you like to have this done (This is strictly for immediate non-life threatening circumstances… if you were dying… options is not what you have/want.) questions and costs.

There needs to be more upfront hostpital client interaction. Most hospitals use an outside source to get the money for whatever procedures were done… meaning the doctors and nurses have no idea how much a procedure or medicine costs. That seems kind of odd. How many professions do you know where the operators have no idea what the cost of whatever their selling or doing.

America is a nation that allows its citizens to carry and own guns. One of the most important things to those who founded our land was the will to make sure that in the future American citizens could continue to. Many people feel as though guns are a great pit fall of America and that we should adopt the same policy that England has of strict no-citizen gun control. The only way someone could have access to them is to be in the military or part of a strict gun club in which the guns are only allowed in their building lockers… or of cource black market.

A telling chart that shows even if there are more guns out there… doesn’t mean that more people are getting killed by guns. Another big issue lies in the fact that even places that outlaw guns such as England… gun crimes are still just as prevelant.

Evidence that supports this comes down to some simple human nature.

The best currently available evidence, imperfect though it is (and must always be), indicates that general gun availability has no measurable net positive effect on [crime] rates…. This is not [to] say gun availability has no effects on violence – it has many … but these effects work in both violence-increasing and violence-decreasing directions, with the effects largely canceling out. For example, when aggressors have guns, they are (1) less likely to physically attack their victims, (2) less likely to injure the victim given an attack, but (3) more likely to kill the victim, given an injury. Further, when victims have guns, it is less likely aggressors will attack or injure them and less likely they will lose property in a robbery. [Taken together] … the best available time series and cross-sectional studies [show that], the overall net effect of gun availability on total rates of violence is not significantly different from zero. [Emphasis in original.]¹

Generally if you are going to make an aggressive action against someone… if they are armed you are likely not to attack. If a person is going to attack someone else to lets say rob them… they do so because the perceive the target as weaker or perhaps unaware of their presence. It is not likely a person will try to rob someone else if that other person know the other person could potentially kill or do a lot of harm to them without any reward (getting away with money ect…). I think the right to defend yourself against a person who wishes to do you harm is extremely important and just as the old saying goes… guns don’t kill people… people kill people.

Here is a break down of dollars and cent cost rising of US gas prices.

You can see the mounmental increase over time.

So I have found an amazing website that does nothing more than how gas prices work.

Howstuffworks.com (Link attached).

“

When you pump $30 into your tank, that money is broken up into little pieces that get distributed among several entities. Gas is just like any other consumer product: There’s a supply chain and several groups who are responsible for setting the price of the product. The media can sometimes lead you to believe that the price of gas is based solely on the price of crude oil, but there are actually many factors that determine what you pay at the pump. No matter how expensive gas becomes, all of these entities have to get their slice of the pie. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, here’s an approximation of where each dollar you spend on gas goes:

• Taxes: 11 cents
• Distribution and Marketing: 6 cents
• Refining: 10 cents
• Crude oil: 73 cents “

This little except shows exactly where all the money you spend goes to. On the site it goes through and breaks down each of these aspects into a “what it is and does.” The site talks about some of the reasons for the gas price surges

“However, a new reason emerged during the spring of 2007: legislation out of Washington to incorporate more ethanol into transportation fuels, enough to reduce daily oil imports by 1.5 million barrels by 2017. Between October 2007 and April 2008, ethanol-blended gas was between 4 and 12 percent more expensive than regular gas .”

The introduction of ethanol was though to make things cleaner and cheaper when it came to producing and consuming gas. However, with the gouging of the price of corn, the relative benefits were destroyed by the mass spike in price. The next topic covered is OPEC… in short.

“The single largest entity impacting the world’s oil supplies is the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), a consortium of 13 countries: Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.

Together, these 13 nations are responsible for 40 percent of the world’s oil production and hold the majority of the world’s oil reserves, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). . When OPEC wants to raise the price of crude oil, it simply reduces production. This causes gasoline prices to jump because of the short supply, but also because of the possibility of future reductions. When oil production dips, gas companies get nervous. The mere threat of oil reductions can raise gas prices.”

This article talks about how flawed the system of OPEC can send shock waves of price fluctuations followed by our local US supplies and the controversial arctic oil sites. Why I spent an entire article talking about this site is because its important that people know where the fuel we use comes from and the controversy following it.

Other great articles are on how oil drilling works and how refining oil works.

This is a rather quick post on inter-workings of my last few posts. In order to streamline my railings on automakers and fuel providers. I wanted to post a chart that showed inflation rates of fuels and a reason why automakers should have seen the writing on the wall. Without delay… a post on inflation rates of gas over the last year, I also found this news juxtaposed next to bread price.

Year Item Price Rate of Inflation Mar 1980 Gasoline, unleaded regular, per gallon 1.252 Mar 2005 Gasoline, unleaded regular, per gallon 2.065 2.02% Mar 1980 Bread, white, per lb 0.502 Mar 2005 Bread, white, per lb 1.002 2.80% Mar 1980 Consumer Price Index 80.10 Mar 2005 Consumer Price Index 193.30 3.59%

I think this is a great example of why we need to grab a hold of our economy and fast. In the last 25 years, not counting the most recent 3 years… gas prices has risen nearly double. I really can’t see why automakers didn’t see this coming. The need for more fuel efficient cars is screaming at them. Here is the data… a relative gain at 2.02% every year… for the last 25 years. Who ever does research for these companies must have seen the price restriction and the average American consumer coming.

The other thing is to look at the price of bread. It has nearly double… and most likely its because the cost of shipping and doing business is rising. If gas prices were able to stabilize our economy at least would be able to sustain its prices. Now, obviously the future cannot rely on just fossil fuels… in order to sustain a country that relies on transportation and shipping of goods across vast areas, we need to secure ourselves a good fuel and a efficientcar/truck. In short… auto makers have really no excuse to say, “We didn’t know that the consumer wouldn’t want a big-gas-consuming car,” most people can’t afford to fill their cars for hundreds of dollars a week and have their goods such as bread and milk rise along with it.

I want to begin with this quote I pulled from Newyorktimes… quoting from a long time ago.

So how did the famous 1953 quotation from the former General Motors president Charles E. Wilson — that what was good for our country was good for G.M., and vice versa — become a dated notion to so many people?

How true is that… I often do today’s companies abuse this government and walk on it’s people. Instead of helping the economy, so many giants have fallen and as they topple they wish to be propped up by the government… and in all seriousness… in turn propped up by us, the American people.

Now onto the next reasoning behind my theory in American Auto-Maker failing.

3. Tying up the new ways of fuel in lawsuits and legal battle’.

Both fuel makers and car manufactures were trying to tie up the development of alternative non-”gas” car types and energies. Other’s just refuse to take part. Such as Exxon… (link provided)

Last year, Exxon, which is based in Irving, Texas, celebrated its 125th anniversary, marking a straight line that connects it to John Rockefeller’s original Standard Oil Trust before the government broke up the enterprise. While other oil companies try to paint themselves greener, Exxon’s executives believe their venerable model has been battle-tested. The company’s mantra is unwavering: brutal honesty about the need for oil and gas to power economies for decades to come.

And to be honest, brutal prices are also well within many of these fuels companies and car companies mantras. Another great point is some of the great in’s and outs of legal/political things some of the automakers delve into… lobbying.

So far this year, G.M. has spent $10 million on lobbying, out of $95 million in the past 10 years,placing it at No. 16 on the site’s “top spenders” list.

Ford, which ranks No. 19 on the list, has spent $5.7 million this year, out of $80.6 million the last decade.

And the next great fail of both gas/car companies are their will to not change. The strangle hold on oil and the strict standard for car makers all are there to drive out competition and keep prices high. Although this is mainly targeted at auto makers… fuel and the automobile go hand in hand… and often think the same.

(Link)

Oil is not safe, and oil companies do not follow proper precautions. One of our worst ecological disasters ever, the Exxon Valdez oil spill, recently had its punitive damages reduced from what once totaled $5 billion to $500 million. And such pandering to an industry that can afford to pay for the damage they have done, even over a twenty-year span, if not within a year, should have to do so, as this would deter future careless hiring practices and other precautions not taken, both of which contributed to this disaster. And don’t forget Grist’s note, above, of the hundreds of instances of damage from hurricanes (which come by every year, by the way). The oil industry is more confident that they can get off easily when they make mistakes, and are therefore less likely to take necessary precautions.

Both industries see the government as a scape goat. The car makers of America probably feel as though they can just receive help and get off easy when it comes to repaying its debt of following its protocols. As

Barack Obama has said the auto industry should get assistance, “I think that it can’t be a blank check,” he said Sunday on “60 Minutes.”

Maybe, some of this money should have been spent in developing… or investing… or research? Maybe? The same companies that tried to lock up the production and research of Hydrogen fueled cars, by stating that people would be unsafe… that in effect they would be driving hydrogen bombs. Long story short.. the ruling went against them after many years stating that… in order to have a Hydrogen bomb you need uranium… of which a Hydrogen cars don’t have.

In any even, these companies should spend less money and time on stopping new technology and research and more time figuring out a way to secure a future. A lot of problems could be solved from these companies if less time was spent tying up other companies and events and focus on a good business model… one that focuses less others and more on the industry itself.