You Shouldn’t Have Run Joe

26 Friday Apr 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Conservatives, Discrimination, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, Government, Honor, Politicians, Politics, racism, Respect, United States, US History, Voting, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2020, career politician, Joe Biden, Politics, President, United States

Joe Biden disqualifies himself to be President

An Open Letter to Joe Biden

Dear Joe Biden,

What the hell are you thinking? Seriously, you think you can begin a campaign to be President of the United States by quoting a document that was written angry white men who didn’t believe that slaves or women were equal, and no one is going to notice?

Don’t get me wrong, the Declaration of Independence is an important document in our country’s history, but if you’re trying to talk about equality you need to talk about the journey our country took to recognize that all are equal, not just what a group of wealthy white men wrote down about equality for wealthy white men.

You also apparently believe that you can make one call to an African American woman and apologize for your inappropriate behavior and that qualifies you to be President. When our son doesn’t do his homework, then later apologizes for not doing his homework, he still doesn’t get to do a sleepover.

If you were truly attempting to atone for your behavior you would have called Anita Hill, apologized, then told her that your behavior against her and other women is why you shouldn’t be President. That is what sincerity is about. That is atonement.

You shouldn’t have run Joe. This was a mistake before you made your announcement and your announcement itself proves why you should be President.

I don’t dislike you. You have worked hard in your life to try and correct the mistakes you have made, but you still don’t understand why old white men are not the people who should lead our country out of this mess created by old white men.

SpaceX Public Relations: Secrecy is Modus Operandi

04 Thursday Apr 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Communism, Conservatives, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Ethics, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Government, Government Regulation, Management Practices, Mars, NASA, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Soviet Russia, Space, SpaceX, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

commercial space, Falcon Heavy, manned space program, privatization, Public Image, Public Relations, space business, space exploration, space flight, spaceflight, SpaceX, static fire test

[UPDATE: Eric Ralph, a writer for Telsalarti, posted an article saying that the Falcon Heavy launch was likely to be delayed and that it was “OK.” Again, Ralph is a knowledgable source but not an official source, so SpaceX is not accountable for the speculation. Source: Teslarati 4 Apr 2019.]

SpaceX is scheduled to launch the new Block 5 version of the Falcon Heavy on Sunday (7 April) sometime between 6:36 PM and 8:35 PM EDT. We know this from an official source of information that was made available on 22 March. That information was not provided by SpaceX to the directly to the public. SpaceX reported it as required; however, if not for that requirement, the public would have no information on the time or date of the launch. The public is given the silent treatment while SpaceX collects billions in taxpayer dollars.

While a lot of people are distracted by a Raptor in Texas, 27 Merlin 1Ds are hoping to attract your attention in Florida.

KSC goes into Critical Support from 20:30 Local (March 31) to 20:30 Local (April 1), meaning rollout to 39A likely on Sunday and then Static Fire on April 1. pic.twitter.com/nXUtGIiKsJ

— Chris B – NSF (@NASASpaceflight) March 27, 2019

This tweet by Michael Baylor, a managing editor for NASASpaceflight.com and considered a highly knowledgeable source, was wrong. SpaceX has remained silent.

SpaceX Public Relations: Code of Secrecy

Because SpaceX is a private company, they’re not required to tell the public anything,…and they don’t. This leads to speculation through other sources and that speculation works to their favor. By not making announcements about time or dates, they can’t be held responsible for delays. SpaceX avoids negative publicity by not being accountable to the public. The new reality of public relations in space exploration is that everything is on a need to know basis…and the public doesn’t need to know.

Prep for Falcon Heavy Static Fire Test…in 2018

Falcon Heavy Problems?

This week’s Block 5 Falcon Heavy debut is a prime example of how SpaceX uses secrecy to their advantage. Instead of informing the public, the public relations people at SpaceX are taking a low profile prior to the launch. No announcements, no tweets.

Speculation has been made that the static fire test (a short test-firing of the engines) would occur on Monday (1 April,) Wednesday (3 April,) and now Thursday (4 April.) [Sources: Teslarati 28 Mar 2019 – E. Ralph, Spaceflight Now 1-3 Apr 2019 – S. Clark] Again, not from official sources, but by knowledgeable sources. This type of teasing drives SpaceX fans into a feeding frenzy of speculation, but SpaceX isn’t accountable for any of the speculation, regardless of how knowledgable the source.

This allows SpaceX to miss a projected date or time for the static fire test because they never said when the test would occur. It is likely that the information in the above tweet by Michael Baylor was accurate and something has happened to cause SpaceX to push back the static fire test, but they don’t have to reveal that to the public. They can keep the public guessing until it becomes obvious that the launch date and time will not be met.

This also allows SpaceX to minimize failure while wildly pronouncing a success. If the launch is a success, SpaceX will make public announcements with video of every positive aspect of the launch. If the Falcon Heavy launch fails SpaceX will likely cut video feeds to the public and wait several hours to form a carefully crafted explanation that will suggest the failure was an expected risk of a rocket launch. Then they will go silent.

This is what SpaceX did on the first Falcon Heavy (Block 4) launch when the booster core failed to land on the drone ship. The video feed was cut when the booster crashed near the ship and damaged the engines. SpaceX then didn’t confirm or deny what happened until several hours later, even though they had a continuous video of the event. [Source: The Verge 6 Feb 2018 – L. Grush]

Why Should the Public Know?

Roughly half of SpaceX’s revenue has come from the taxpayers pocket. According to Sam Dunkovich, $5.5 billion of SpaceX $12 billion in launch contracts are from NASA or the U.S. military [Source: RealClear Policy 2 Feb 2018.] SpaceX wouldn’t be in the space industry if it were not for the financial revenue it gains from the U.S. taxpayer. The first launch of a Block 5 Falcon Heavy is a significant milestone of how our money is being spent by this private company.

Space exploration has been a public concern since Soviet Russia launched Sputnik on 4 October 1957. The conservatives desire to privatize space exploration is at best an experiment and certainly is a one-sided political agenda. By withholding information from the taxpayers, the effectiveness of that political agenda cannot be fairly determined.

Secrecy in public relations is a Soviet model and not acceptable in the United States. Withholding information from the public to hide the true situation is still a lie. This is why private business is incapable of overseeing themselves and should be required to inform the public of their true activities and problems.

No Pressure, But If the Falcon Heavy Fails, So Does SpaceX

31 Sunday Mar 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Human Resources, jobs, labor, Management Practices, NASA, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Science Fiction, Space, SpaceX, Technology, The Tipping Point, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

commercial space, Dragon 2, Dragon Capsule, Elon Musk, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, International Space Station, manned space program, manned spacecraft, space business, space exploration, space flight, Space X, spaceflight, SpaceX

SpaceX has put themselves in a corner. Next week’s launch of the new Block 5 Falcon Heavy has to go almost flawlessly or much, if not all, of what they have will go down in flames with the rocket.

SpaceX 1 September 2016 Static Test Explosion – Ignition

SpaceX’s Financial State

SpaceX played a risky game last year focusing on making money in commercial launches. That should have been a big boost to their revenue stream, but in January they announced layoffs. SpaceX also announced a sudden cut in the number of launches in 2019. [Source: Business Insider 21 Jan 2019 – Dave Mosher] That might indicate that SpaceX was offering bargain prices to its customers to land contracts but losing money in the process.

One line in a statement made to Business Insider by a SpaceX representative regarding the layoffs is telling:

This action is taken only due to the extraordinarily difficult challenges ahead and would not otherwise be necessary.

SpaceX Statement

Taken at face value, SpaceX’s rationale for the massive layoffs in its rocket manufacturing division sounds like a proactive business strategy, but why be so forceful in the justification? They insist that the “only” reason for the layoffs is for the “challenges ahead.” SpaceX then repeats itself at the end of the sentence by saying, “and would not otherwise be necessary.”

SpaceX 1 September 2016 Static Test Explosion – Upper Booster Engulfed

The Organization Doth Protest Too Much

The defensiveness of the statement indicates that the layoffs are necessary because SpaceX is already in trouble. By saying the layoffs were to prepare for a grim future, they may have confirmed that they were a reactionary, not proactive move.

SpaceX 1 September 2016 Static Test Explosion – Entire Rocket/Pad Engulfed

The Falcon Heavey Gambit

Up to now, SpaceX has landed customers on bargain pricing, but it is likely that they desperately need to attract customers that can pay top dollar. Enter the U.S. military. SpaceX has yet to gain the full confidence of the U.S. Air Force for their military satellites. Elon Musk may have thought that one successful launch using the old Block 4 boosters would have the U.S. military eating out of their hand, but that didn’t happen.

Now SpaceX desperately needs another spectacular success of the Falcon Heavy to convince those with deep pockets that their bird is equal or better than the competition.

But what if the next Falcon Heavy launch is a failure?

SpaceX 1 September 2016 Static Test Explosion – Upper Stage with payload fall to the ground

What’s at Risk for SpaceX

It is unlikely that SpaceX will experience the worst-case scenario of the complete loss of the Falcon Heavy and its Arabsat 6A satellite, but what would happen if the nightmare happened?

No space cred for the Falcon Heavy. The Falcon Heavy would not be in consideration for heavy-lift payloads by the military, nor private customers at any price.

No human-rating cred for Block 5 redesign. NASA requires seven successful launches of the Block 5 booster without a significant redesign to gain a human rating. The 15 November 2018 launch of Booster 1047 was the first with newly designed tanks. Since then, SpaceX has had six launches with the new design. The Falcon Heavy would be the seventh launch. Failure would mean another delay in obtaining the human rating for the Block 5 booster.

Loss of two Falcon 9 Block 5 boosters and one Block 5 core. The two side boosters would be the biggest loss. They are planned to be reused on the next Falcon Heavy flight in July. That flight would have to be delayed for months and SpaceX can’t afford that delay. Remember that layoff? That hit the rocket manufacturing plant the hardest.

More expense with no revenue. Insurance would cover most, if not all, of the loss of the vehicle, but it’s not going to provide more revenue. More cuts would have to follow, pushing back the launch schedule even farther.

Loss of pad, more delays. It would be bad if SpaceX lost the vehicle in flight, but in the worst-case scenario, the loss would occur on the pad. It could be a year or more to rebuild the launch pad. The destruction of the pad and the two side boosters would bring into question whether SpaceX could make the contracted cargo deliveries to the ISS.

Testing of the Dragon 2 crew capsule flights would be jeopardized. If the April launch of the Falcon Heavy fails, Boeing would probably be able to coast into NASA’s crew capsule contract.

Enough Pessimism, What If the Falcon Heavy Flies!

A win for SpaceX would be a successful launch and recovery of at least the two side boosters, but that only buys them three months. The April Falcon Heavy launch is Act I of a two-act play. Act II is a follow-up flight in July of the Falcon Heavy reusing the two side boosters from the April launch. Part of the show is to demonstrate that the boosters can be turned around and relaunched in a matter of weeks.

The U.S. Air Force may give SpaceX a heavy-lift contract even before the July flight of the Falcon Heavy; however, it is likely that they will negotiate a below market price and it may be contingent on both the April and July flights meeting all expectations.

False Bravado

Less than a year ago Elon Musk was boasting that in 2019, SpaceX would have a 24-hour turnaround on a Block 5 booster. [Source: NASASpaceflight.com 17 May 2018 – Michael Baylor] Eight months later SpaceX was cutting their labor force by ten percent. Rather than two launches of the same booster in 24 hours, this year SpaceX is struggling to have more than one launch per month.

SpaceX fans worship Elon Musk’s great vision but there is a fine line between vision and false bravado. Musk is known to continually overstep that line. Now one misstep with next week’s Falcon Heavy launch and SpaceX is risking a lot more than the loss of one satellite.

White Racists: Always About Power Over Non-Whites

04 Tuesday Dec 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Conservatives, Discrimination, Ethics, Government, History, Honor, Politicians, Politics, racism, Religion, Respect, Small town, United States, US History, Water

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Colorado, Craig, Massacre, Meeker, Moffat County, Nathan Meeker, Native Americans, Rifle, Rio Blanco County, Utah, Ute Indians, Utes

Racism has always been about power. The power to dominate another group of people is at the core of white supremacist groups. When the South formed the Confederate State of America, they were provoking a civil war in order to maintain their power and control over African Americans. Historically, racism has been the tool of the Caucasian race to threaten and intimidate non-Caucasians.

But African Americans were not the only target of white racists.

Nathan Meeker: Tool of White Power

In 1878, Nathan Meeker was appointed as the Indian agent overseeing the Ute Indians of northwestern Colorado. Meeker was not qualified, nevertheless, he was appointed. He needed the job to pay off loans to the daughters of Horace Greeley. Meeker took out those loans to establish a religious-based utopian colony at what is now Greeley, Colorado. Meeker’s colony was a failure and he found himself in a financial bind when his loan was called due.

Nathan Meeker: Indian agent, racist

As the Indian agent of the White River Agency, Meeker saw the Native Americans as lesser people. In an article published shortly before his appointment he said:

…They are savages, having no written language, no traditional history, no poetry, no literature . . . a race without ambition, and also a race deficient in the inherent elements of progress. Vermin abound on their persons,…

Nathan Meeker

Shortly after Meeker assumed his job as Indian agent, Frederick Walker Pitkin became Governor, in part, on a slogan, “The Utes Must Go!” He and others exaggerated claims of ‘Indian problems’ in an effort to justify a forced relocation of the Utes off of land with valuable resources.

Meeker was the tip of the racist sword as the Indian agent. Meeker decided it was his job to pound the Utes tribes into submission. His goal was to force the Ute Indians to adopt his agricultural and religious values. The Utes were nomadic hunter-gatherers but Meeker wanted to make them farmers. This resulted in tension between the Utes and Meeker that led to an altercation.

The Utes had created a place for gathering and competing in horse races. Meeker objected to this and decided to plow under the area. It was a racist move to provoke a reaction. He got it. When confronted by the Utes, Meeker claimed he was attacked by the Ute chief and severely injured. More reliable versions of the story say he was push and fell to the ground.

Chain of Tragedies

Meeker wired for military support and used the incident as cause for immediate action. On 21 September 1879, Major Thomas T. Thornberg led a force of about 175 men from Fort Steele in South Central Wyoming. The Utes knew or suspected that Meeker had requested troops to be sent to the area.

On 29 September, a band of Ute Indians attacked the White River Agency and killed Meeker and ten male employees. They then took some of the women and children as hostages.

By accident or design, the Utes met the incoming army later that day about 30 km from the White River Agency. The Utes pinned Thornberg’s force down and killed the Major and 13 of his men. The troops held out several days until 35 of the all-African American Buffalo Soldiers arrived from southwestern Colorado.

After rescuing the remain Thornberg forces, negotiations took place to gain the release of the hostages.

Aftermath of a Provoked Attack

There is no doubt that Nathan Meeker’s incompetence and aggression provoked the attack. There is no doubt that many white people settling in Colorado wanted the Native Americans out. There is also no doubt that the Ute’s involved in the attacks were wrong in taking a drastic action against the agency and the U.S. Army. It was a mistake for which their people would pay dearly.

The attacks were the perfect excuse to move the Ute Indians out of Colorado. Initially a deal was struck for one tribe of Ute Indians to remain, but eventually, the government renigged on the deal and forced all Utes to a reservation in Utah. Within three years after the attack, all Native Americans had been relocated.

The white racists of Colorado got what they wanted. Ranchers and miners moved in quickly. Soon after the turn of the century, homesteading began and hundreds packed up everything they owned to claim a new life in Colorado.

Postscript

It is somewhat ironic that all this resulted in little benefit to the incoming white culture in the area. The current population of both Rio Blanco and Moffat Counties in northwestern Colorado is less than 20,000 people in an area that is about the size of Massachusetts (12,800 km.) The population is almost the same as it was for the 2000 census. The economy is almost completely dependent on coal mining, an electric generating plant, and hunting/fishing tourism.

Educational Landmines: Questioning the Pedagogy of Your Child’s School

17 Monday Sep 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Business, College, Conservatives, Discrimination, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Higher Education, jobs, labor, Life, Nevada, parenting, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, racism, Religion, Reno, Science, Taxes, Universities, US History, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

administration, Conservatives, Education, Education methods, Management Practices, pedagogy, public education, Public Image, school boards, teachers, Washoe County School District, WCSD

Education 2020 – Part I: Criticizing Pedagogy

Dangers of Discussing Pedagogy

Before any discussion of education begins, one must accept that if a parent questions the pedagogy (the methods and practice of teaching) of their child’s school that they risk being attacked, especially by other parents. My personal experience has been that other parents may become passionate about how wonderful the school is, even if there is clear documentation of problems within the school.

Sadly, parents who do criticize their child’s school often lack the knowledge and understanding of pedagogy to intelligently discuss issues and concerns. This has created a long history of parent’s crying ‘wolf’ about problems in the school. Now, all parents are assumed to be uninformed and overprotective, and their concerns and issues to be insignificant.

However, parents do have a legitimate perspective on the education of their children. It must be assumed that the parent will be biased toward their own child, but that does not completely negate the perspective.

Who Are the Experts For Pedagogy?

Ideally, pedagogy should be influenced by people who have expertise in education. Experience and or advanced degrees in the field are factors, but should one educator’s opinions determine the pedagogy for all educators? Research is also a factor; however, simple data (graduation rates, test scores, etc.) is not research because this data is not peer-reviewed. Without peer review, critical questions are left unanswered regarding the validity of the data.

In our country’s current political climate, the idea of equal opportunity in education for all has been supplanted by education to meet the needs of corporations and religious interests. The decades-long effort of lower taxes and attacks on public schools have led conservatives to invade the school boards and districts to plant a new agenda that benefits particular groups. To support their agenda, conservatives often use single viewpoints of an expert touting his or her ‘years’ of educational experience, or advance degrees to support their political agenda.

Who Speaks For the Children?

Is there a legitimate voice in determining the pedagogy of our schools? Yes and no. Teachers and students are the core of education of our youth. Mentoring, not rigor should be the core of pedagogy in any legitimate school. Pedagogy should not be guided by what will make a student a better worker, but by what will develop the skills and ability of the student to make them a better person. Parents are biased, but parents should serve as an assistant to teachers regarding their child’s education.

Most administrators and politicians should not have a significant role in pedagogy simply because they may have a corrupted interest in what is best for the student. Cutting costs, serving political and/or religious interests, etc. should not be part of the teacher/student interaction.

Finally, research, not data, should be at the core of pedagogy. The research should be unbiased for gender, race, and/or socioeconomic status. Graduation rates are meaningless unless there it can be documented that graduating from high school has led to personal, economic, and social success in adult life after graduation. College-bound rates are meaningless unless the student actually succeeds in college and completes a degree. Test scores and standardized tests are meaningless unless it can be proven that high test scores relate to success in adult life.

The Education 2020

It is dangerous territory to initiate a discussion on pedagogy and education in the United States of America; however, it is absolutely necessary. The future is determined by the wisdom of the present. Now is the time to discuss and correct the derailment of pedagogy in our schools.

The purpose of the Education 2020 series is to continue the discussion, identify the problems, and seek solutions.

Hey, Small Hands. Don’t Screw With the U.S. Postal Service

14 Saturday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, jobs, labor, Management Practices, Nevada, Panama, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Reno, Russian influence, Taxes, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Amazon, delivery, Donald Trump, FedEx, Jeff Bezos, mail, Post Office, U.S. Postal Service, UPS, Washington Post

Republican Head Witch Donald Trump is doing his Kylo Ren tantrum by attacking the U.S. Postal Service for revenge. He’s mad at Amazon’s CEO Jeff Bezos because of fact-based articles about him in the Washington Post. I know, it’s confusing and silly, but aren’t most temper tantrums? The problem is that Trump is threatening to screw up a great service for our country because he has the maturity of a three-year-old.

Much Ado About the U.S. Postal Service

Trump is attacking the U.S. Postal Service because it gives a volume discount to Amazon on shipping its products to its customers. The partnership gives the Post Office vital business income and forces it to be more efficient. Amazon gets better shipping fees that help reduce the cost to its customers, and a delivery service that can handle the volume of packages it ships.

Home Delivery: What Makes the United States Great

Jeff Bezos owns both Amazon and the Washington Post, so in Trump’s little mind attacking the Post Office is a way to attack Amazon, which is a way to attack Jeff Bezos, which is a way to attack the Washington Post. Yes, Trump is really that immature.

While we are on the subject, it is reported that the U.S. Post Office will lose $1.50 on average for each package it delivers for Amazon. That amounts to Billions of Dollars. The Failing N.Y. Times reports that “the size of the company’s lobbying staff has ballooned,” and that…

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 31, 2018

Don’t Screw With a Good Thing

What many citizens may not realize that while the U.S. Postal Service doesn’t break even, it is vital to our country. Most importantly is the security it gives us in sending letters and parcels around the country. In the USA, we take it for granted and become really upset on the rare occasions our mail is lost. That is not the case in many countries.

A person can’t send a letter to someone in Panama and expect it to be delivered. If it is a package, it will almost never be delivered. It takes a very organized, very committed postal service to keep the integrity of delivery that we have in the United States. We trust that we can give something to a stranger and it will arrive at its destination in a reasonable amount of time. That is the exception in the world, not the rule.

The U.S. Postal Service also employees over half a million people in jobs that pay a living wage in communities small and large. For the service we receive, we also have half a million people not looking for a decent job. That has a major impact on our economy.

What About the Alternative Services?

FedEx and UPS have been good competitors with the U.S. Postal Service, but they don’t replace the mail carrier. They even have partnerships with the Post Office to that allow them to focus on more profitable business. They pass off less profitable package delivery that requires more service, such as some residential deliveries with more stops.

Let’s keep the investigations of things that don’t work to the people and services that really have problems…like Donald Trump.

Did F-117 Nighthawk Defeat USSR?

12 Thursday Apr 2018

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Air Force, Communism, F-117, Fall of USSR, fighter jet, military, Nighthawk, Russia, SAMs, Soviet Russia, surface to air missiles, U.S. Air Force, USSR

On 25 December 1991, Soviet Russia ended in a relative peaceful exchange of power. There were many reasons for the fall of communism, but one plane may have put the final stamp on the Soviet fate. Eleven months prior, the F-117 Nighthawk flew 1,300 sorties (missions) over Iraq during the Gulf War and proved it was almost invincible to modern air defenses. No one even knew about the plane three years prior to the Gulf War and with its domination over Iraq, the Soviets had lost the Cold War.

F-117 Nighthawk: The SciFi plane that won the Cold War?

F-117 Nighthawk: Plane of Science Fiction

A crazy idea. An invisible plane, at least invisible to radar. A plane that could sneak in and out of enemy airspace undetected. It was so crazy, no one thought it could be done…except Lockheed Martin. The absurdity of a stealth plane that could avoid radar detection helped keep it a secret until after it was already a reality.

The one problem was that a human couldn’t fly it. The aerodynamics of the odd surface angles changed the airflow around the plane and a pilot didn’t have the reflexes to respond fast enough before the plane was out of control. The pilot had to be assisted by a computer that interpreted the commands. It was the computer that managed the control surfaces to keep the Nighthawk from crashing.

The handling characteristics of the plane were a trade-off to the possibility of having a bomber that could breach enemy airspace undetected. A bomber that could hit targets with almost perfect accuracy. Soviet Russia had poured its technology into surface-to-air missiles (SAMs.) Those missiles could track down U.S. military jets and blow them out of the sky. Their effectiveness; however, depended on radar locating the jet. Without radar detection, Soviet SAMs could not be launched.

A New Reality

Once the Soviets learned of the F-117 Nighthawk, they knew that the United States could launch a first strike on Russia. An attack that they wouldn’t know about it until the first bomb hit the target. At the time, the Cold War had died down, but the Nighthawk made the idea of a war with the United States unwinnable. After the F-117 was revealed to the world, all of the military might of Soviet Russia became vulnerable to a handful of invisible planes.

In truth, there were many reasons that Soviet Russia fell. The decline of communism happened over decades. The economic and social issues were the prime causes of the USSR, but the F-117 created a new reality that Soviet Russia had not anticipated, nor could they overcome.

Eulogy For Donald Trump

08 Sunday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Conservatives, Donald Trump, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, Government, History, Honor, Life, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Religion, Russian influence, Taxes, United States, US History, Vladimir Putin, Voting, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

death, Donald Trump, end of life, Eulogy, feckless, judgement, Republicans, sins, Trumpsters

We are here to celebrate the passing of Donald Trump. Let us not dwell on the life of a man who was a failure as a human, but focus on what his life taught us. Donald Trump was more than a prime example of the baseness of human nature. He was the darkness that exposed the darkness of others. We need no deity to judge other people when a person like Trump can readily draw out the perverseness of others.

Donald Trump: Hero of the Darkness

The Donald Trump Effect

Without Trump we would not have known:

How feckless Republicans are, and how impotent they are as leaders. Repeatedly, Trump embarrassed the Republican party and they all smiled and accepted it. When they did contradict him it was tentative and short-lived. They were clearly subservient to Trump and demonstrated a fear of his wrath.
The perverse nature of Christian evangelicals that claim freedom of religion as long as it is their religion and not any other version. Trump mocked the Bible on a daily basis and they loved him for it.
How racists and paternalistic conservatives are as they manufactured issues that just happen to target non-whites and women. We suspected that race and gender were the underlying motives, but Trump ‘said’ what they were thinking and now we know for sure.
The depth of the greed of the powerful and wealthy in the United States. If there is a deity, She has no need to judge them. Their sins are self-evident, thanks to Donald Trump.

Donald Trump was a person that drew out the poison of our society. Trumpsters felt that with Trump, they no longer needed to hide the ugliness inside them. These people would have been able escape notice had it not been for Donald Trump.

So as we celebrate his death, let us celebrate the what he did for our country. Trump divided us into Constitution loving, respectful, compassionate people…and Trumpsters. Let us rejoice!

SpaceX’s Magical Block 5 Booster is a No Show

06 Friday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Government, Honor, Management Practices, Mars, NASA, Nevada, Public Image, Public Relations, Reno, Science, Space, SpaceX, Technology, The Tipping Point, United States, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Block 5, booster, delays, F9, Falcon 9, first stage, promises, SpaceX

Today is 6 April 2018. That deafening roar that you DIDN’T hear yesterday was the SpaceX Block 5 Falcon 9 rocket. It didn’t launch yesterday. Nor did it launch in February…nor in December. SpaceX plans fall short of reality again. The trademark of Elon Musk’s and his companies are their ability to fail to live up to their claims.

SpaceX One Trick: Wasting Money to Reland Junk Boosters

Block 5 Falcon 9 – The Grand Promise

Block 5 is the made-up name for SpaceX’s final version of the Falcon 9. It is critical to their hope to be NASA’s go-to company for the manned space program. There is a catch. SpaceX has to fly the Block 5 booster seven times without making any upgrades or changes before NASA will put humans onboard.

There is another catch. SpaceX entire company has been built around one concept: economical space flight. Their method is reusability, and the centerpiece is the reusable booster. Musk has made grand claims that the SpaceX booster will be used ten times. In addition, some people have been suggesting that the booster will only need an inspection and will be able to be reflown in a matter of days.

To date, the maximum any booster has been reused is once (F9 Boosters B1021, B1023, B1025, B1029, B1031, B1032, B1035, B1036, B1038, B1039, B1041.) Of the eleven reflown boosters, six were relanded after the second flight, but then they were ‘retired’ or junked. The rest were ‘expended’ or destroyed. None of these boosters were Block 5 types.

The Snake Oil of Spaceflight

Any cost savings of the reusable booster have been eliminated by the waste of expending, relanding, and recovering junk boosters. The delays of the Block 5 are costing SpaceX money, and the idea that a booster can be landed, inspected, and reflown in days was the boast of NASA with the Space Shuttle. NASA found out the hard way. It is not possible without endangering lives.

The other aspect of this is that only SpaceX knows how much these launches really cost. They are not making the cost per launch available to the public. They could be charging much less than the actual cost to hide the fact that the reusable booster doesn’t actually save money.

Space Customers Are Watching

The first Block 5 flight is now scheduled for 24 April. The first SpaceX crewed flight was scheduled for December. It is improbable, and likely impossible that SpaceX will be able to have seven successful Block 5 flights in time to meet the December deadline.

This delay comes after a five-year delay in the launch of the Falcon Heavy. The first one was a spectacular success, but there are two more scheduled launches of the Falcon Heavy this year. Both have to be on time and successful, or SpaceX will face increasing doubts about its reliability.

The Dichotomy of Small Towns: Good People, Small Minds

04 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, All Rights Reserved, College, Communication, Conservatives, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Education, Generational, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Higher Education, History, jobs, Lessons of Life, Life, Nevada, parenting, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Religion, Reno, Small town, Travel, United States, Universities, US History, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

aging, CO, confirmation bias, Craig, groupthink, Music Man, Roosevelt, small town life, Small towns, UT

Small communities are two kinds of special. A small community can be a place of good people who would do anything for each other and will help out a stranger if needed. They also can have a darker side of illegal activities, whispered gossip of secret knowledge, and a narrow view of the rest of the world. It is the Jeckle and Hyde personality of a small town that is never discussed, but almost always there.

Small towns: The Pretty

Ruts of a Small Town

Change happens in small towns, but it often follows a counterintuitive logic. If the change is rational, involving a relatively workable plan of implementation, it is often viciously opposed by some people in the community. If the change is a Music Man-type (see video clip below) change consisting of unproven goals with lofty promises, a small community often embraces it.

Small towns. The Ugly

What that means is that small communities often don’t change significantly over time. The ‘BIG’ change that is going to reinvent the community typically falls flat. That results if a fear of change. Without change, life becomes a rut that everyone falls into.

Aging and Small Towns: The ‘Comfort Zone’

Growing up in a small town is an interesting window into human development. Ask high school students what they want to do when they graduate and often the response is, “Get out of this hick town as fast as possible.” Small towns often don’t have enough jobs for high school graduating classes. College is often the best way for children to break out of the small town cycle.

But even those who go off to college sometimes return because there is a ‘comfort zone’ in living where hu grew up. As people grow older, the desire to ‘get out of Dodge’ is replaced with the fear of living somewhere else. That fear is eventually replaced by an intense loyalty to small-town life. Usually, older the person, the more defensive they are about living in a small town.

Small Towns and Confirmation Bias

In a small town, everyone knows everyone. As people age, they have a select few friends that they have significant contact. In some cases, daily contact. Unlike cities, people in small towns may see the same people at work, at school, at the grocery store, at church, etc. This immersion with other people creates intimate friendships that are as close, possibly closer, than marriage relationships.

People in small towns have limited experiences with people outside of their community and intimate friendships. They tend to develop a groupthink about the world and people outside their community. When all your close friends have the same lack of knowledge and experience with the rest of the world, people are exposed to ‘confirmation bias.’ This bias occurs when friends confirm a person’s beliefs, and other information that might counter those beliefs are ignored or unknown by the group.

Typically, confirmation bias fosters negative attitudes about people who are not like them. That leads to a conservative mindset that is easily exploited. It is not a coincidence that rural environments are ripe for politically conservative influence because they focus on telling rural communities exactly what they want to hear.

Small Town Black Holes

All of this is a generalization of small town people. To be fair, problems of larger communities, such as traffic, noise, pollution, homelessness, etc. are not the ideals of any community; however, small towns have an environment that generates the same patterns over and over. Children in a small town will often grow up to be like hu’s parents. People living in a marginal society disjoined from the world.

Should Federal Dollars Go To States With Low Taxes?

03 Tuesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, All Rights Reserved, Business, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Government, Honor, jobs, labor, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Reno, Taxes, Technology, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

capital gains tax, Colorado, corporate tax, federal dependent states, federal money, income tax, low tax states, low taxes, Nevada, Sierra Nevada Corp., state tax, tax, tax fairness, taxes

Nevada has no income tax, no corporate tax, no inventory tax, and no capital gains tax. Should the rest of the country be taxed to give money to Nevada? The idea that some State and local governments can avoid taxing their citizens, but expect to receive federal tax dollars is a question of fairness and equity. Perhaps the federal government should base allocations to States based on their willingness to act fiscally responsible?

Some States Pull Their Weight

Low Taxes Myth

There is a myth that low State taxes attracts businesses, that in turn, attracts jobs for the citizens. In Nevada, the tax haven does attract companies, but only those that seek to dodge taxes. The Sierra Nevada Corporation is a prime example. They are a private defense contractor that, among other things, seek to become the next privatized NASA.

The Sierra Nevada Corporation sounds like it would be a major employer in Nevada. It is not. Currently, it claims to have over 3,500 employees in 33 locations around the world. In 2014, about one-third of its employees were in Colorado and the potential job growth is at its Colorado facilities.

However, its corporate headquarters is in Nevada. The company was founded in Nevada; however, the State does not have the caliber of workers needed for the high technology jobs. So why not move the company to Colorado? Because the corporate staff and the company enjoy the tax immunity of Nevada.

Freeloader States

According to WalletHub.com, the ten State governments that are most dependent on federal money are as follows:

Louisiana
Mississippi
Arizona
Kentucky
New Mexico
Montana
Oregon
Tennessee
Missouri
Alaska

These States are the top ten with the lowest taxes on their residents, (with the ranking of federal dollar dependency,) according to USA Today (Taxes on corporations are not included):

Alaska (10)
Wyoming (20)
South Dakota (14)
Tennessee (8)
Louisiana (1)
Texas (21)
New Hampshire (31)
Nevada (36)
South Carolina (29)
Oklahoma (26)

Three of the top five having the lowest State taxes are also among the top ten State governments most dependent on federal money. The residents of another three of the top ten States with low taxes are in the top fifty percent in dependency on federal subsistence.

Five of the top ten States (Alaska, Wyoming, South Dakota, Texas, and Nevada) with the lowest taxes have no State income tax.

Pulling Their Weight

Many States use federal money to supplement their own tax revenue. It is only fair that they should. It is unfair that some States tilt the tax revenue field and expect federal money to replace State revenue. Perhaps it’s time that federal money should be restricted from States that do not have an adequate local and State tax structure to provide a foundation for services for their citizens before federal money is given to them.

Tax Breaks Don’t Work When Everyone is Giving Them

02 Monday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Business, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, jobs, labor, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Nevada, Panama, Politicians, Politics, Real Estate, Reno, selling, Taxes, Travel, United States, US History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Business, capital gains tax, corporate taxes, income tax, Nevada, tax breaks, tax revenue

The United States of America has a tax problem. We have too many local and state governments using ‘fire-sale’ tactics to attract business through tax breaks. It is a problem caused by conservatives. They have created the myth that taxes hurt business so lower taxes will increase business. The irony is that the strategy that conservatives inflict on government is a strategy that they would laugh at in the business world.

Panama’s strategy of low or no taxes brings in the wrong business

What’s Bad For Business is Bad For Government

When a business puts their products on sale, they do so with the expectation that it will increase business and volume will make up for the lower price. If the sale price is too low the business loses money. In addition, the customer might think there is something wrong with the product when the price is too low. If a company’s competitors match or beat the sale price, everyone loses except the customer. It is not good business.

The same is true for governments. Tax breaks reduce revenue for the maintenance and improvement of local communities. When tax breaks are overused, the community suffers from the lost revenue. The myth is that less tax revenue is more money for everyone only works if the tax break has no significant impact on the quality of the government. In addition, if competing governments are giving the same or better tax breaks the strategy fails for everyone.

In Nevada, the State has no income tax, no inventory tax, no corporate tax, and no capital gains tax. When the state or local government gives a tax break to a business, it is automatically a net loss for the community. Any business moving to Nevada is already coming for the low tax rate and any other break is just giving away money.

Panama’s What Not To Do

Panama has about the same population of Oklahoma. That is not a lot of people for tax revenue purposes. In 1994, Panama passed a law that basically gave a tax break to a property owner for 20 years. It was more complicated than that, but it attracted a lot of foreign investors. What happened?

It attracted people of modest wealth that were looking for only for the tax break. The jobs created were minimal, but it dramatically increased the value of land and property. Citizens of Panama suddenly found that home prices skyrocketed and because many were living as tenants, they had to move when the landlord sold the property for more money.

The end result was no one benefited from the tax strategy but wealthy developers.

Tax Breaks Always Fail

The reality is that tax breaks always fail. Despite thousands of tax breaks being given by local and state governments every year, there is no evidence that they actually have a positive impact on the citizens of the community. Tax breaks for companies don’t create more jobs, increase worker pay, or improve a dying economy. They make rich people richer.

April Fool’s Day is Donald Trump Day

01 Sunday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, April Fools Day, Assault Weapons, Communism, Conservatives, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Health, History, Honor, Mass Shootings, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Pride, racism, Relationships, Religion, Reno, Respect, Russian influence, Second Amendment, Soviet Russia, Taxes, United States, US History, Vladimir Putin, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

April Fool's Day, April Fools, Donald Trump, GOP, Republican, Republicans, Soviet Republicans, Trumpsters

On the third Monday of February, our country celebrates the great Presidents. For Donald Trump, we have a different holiday. For this day the western world can join in a celebration that even predates our country. We used to call it April Fool’s Day, but now we have the poster child of April Fool’s Day as our President.

Our Biggest April Fool

Donald Trump Day isn’t just for the man who became the Resident of the White House, but it recognizes all Trumpsters who adore hu and hu’s foolish ways. It is a day that the new Soviet Republican party can be remembered for their Collective Closed Mind. This is a holiday that has been in search of its people and now its people have been found!

On this special day let’s remember how special Donald Trump and the Trumpsters are as Fools of Humanity. To be a Fool:

One must believe that freedom of religion means a Taliban-like State where Christian extremists inflict their made-up racist-based mythology on everyone.
A person must accept that gun deaths are caused by non-Trumpsters, and the solution is more guns.
One should know that a man has the obligation to rule over women as subservient beings.
A person must believe that a book of mythological stories of life written over 2,000 years ago. They should think that it is how we should govern all citizens of the United States of America in the 21st century.
One must ignore all facts that contradict what you want to believe.
One must read the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America without the words “militia” and “well regulated.”
One can declare that all non-whites are illegal immigrants and that nullifies all laws prohibiting racism.

We Look Forward to the Day

There are many more, but this is a day for Donald Trump and hu’s Trumpsters. Let them speak for themselves. For the rest of us, we look forward to the day when the holiday only reminds us of Trump reign. Remind us of when Soviet Republicanism briefly took over our country. Remind us of why we celebrate April Fool’s Day only once a year, instead of suffering through it all year.

Our Roving Intelligent Life On Mars

31 Saturday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Astronomy, China, Communism, Exploration, Government, History, Life, Mars, NASA, Photography, Pride, Science, Soviet Russia, Space, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program, Vladimir Putin

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

China, Curiosity, ESA, intelligent life, Joint Propulsion Laboratory, JPL, life, Mars, NASA, Pathfinder, Rovers, roving, Russia, Russia Space Program, Sojourner, Soviet Russia

For over 2000 Mars-days* the Curiosity Rover has been strolling across the landscape of Mars. The Mission is known as the Mars Science Laboratory and the star is Curiousity. Google defines intelligence as, “the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.” Under that definition, Curiosity and its predessors certainly qualify as intelligent life on another planet.

[*Mars-day or sols = 24 hours + 37 minutes of Earth time]

Mars = Soviet Humiliation

To date, humans have attempted to send 55¹ missions to Mars and over half of them have failed. Soviet Russia tried to launch 20 missions and none of them were a complete success. Two misssion were mostly successful, and three of them were mostly failures. The other 15 missions were complete failures.

Russia seemed to give up sending missions to Mars after 1988. Since the fall of Communism, Russia has attempted two probes, both failed. Russia’s only successful probe to the Red planet is a joint orbiter mission with the European Space Agency (ESA) that is still in operation.

In comparison to Russia’s single success out of 23 attempts, India has sent one mission to Mars and the orbiter is now on an extended mission.

[¹NOTE: An orbiter/lander mission is counted as two separate missions.]

What We Know About Mars, Thank NASA/JPL

NASA and its partners like the Joint Propulsion Lab (JPL) have been responsible for putting intelligent life on Mars. Five out of the current eight operational missions are NASA/JPL missions. The Mars Odyssey mission was launched 17 years ago (April 2001) and is expected to be operational until 2025.

The United States is the only country to successfully have a rover on Mars and it has a perfect record in four attempts (Sojourner, Spirit, Opportunity, and Curiosity.) The Opportunity rover was launched in 2003 and is still operational.

Curiosity takes a selfie on Mars

Curiouser and Couriouser

The Couriosity rover was on a two-year mission after its successful 2012 landing. It is now on an extended mission without an end date. It continues to explore and offer new insights; however, it is a mission that has almost been too successful. As it continues to wander around Gale crater, one has to wonder how much more can our rover-on-the-ground learn in one location?

As it rolls beyond 2000 sols will its constant poking, prodding, and picture-taking result in more knowledge, or bias our understanding based on the massive data from one region? Perhaps we will find out in 2020. Three new rovers are scheduled for launch that year. The United States will send Mars 2020, ESA will send ExoMars 2020, and the yet to be named 2020 Chinese Mars Mission will also be sent.

Trump’s Soviet-Style Government

30 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communism, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Pride, racism, Reno, Republic, Respect, Russian influence, Soviet Russia, United States, US History, Vladimir Putin, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Communism, Communist, Communists, Donald Trump, GOP, Republicans, Soviet America, Soviet Russia, Soviets, USSR, Vladimir Putin

Soviet Russia (1917-1991) had an oppressive government where one party ruled with complete authority. Soviet offices were all held by loyal communist party members and corruption was rampant. Donald Trump is creating his own Soviet-style government using the Republican party. They are not concerned about disenfranchising a majority of the citizens, but rather, treat opposing voices as disloyal elements that are to be ignored.

The United Soviet States of America?

Lenin’s Vision of His Soviet Party

Vladimir Lenin held the belief that a government could only be run by one person or a small group of people. He also believed that there were only two kinds of people in the world: friends or enemies. Obviously, friends believed what Lenin believed and everyone else was an enemy.

Like Lenin, Donald Trump sees only two kinds of people. His adoring supporters and disloyal people who are his enemies. Trump seems to see himself as a heroic figure in a tragic situation, besieged by his enemies. His inability to accept any responsibility for his failings and poor judgment is part of his leadership style.

Soviets and Republicans: One Party, One Mind

Lenin divided his party when he demanded that membership must consist of only loyal followers. His groupthink party rejected all other ideas and discussion that contradicted his will. Those who were not loyal were not allowed to participate in his government.

Trump has followed a Lenin-like path with a constant stream of changes in his administration. He has reduced his White House staff to yes-people who do not offer different points of view and seek to please Trump with constant praise and admiration.

Like Lenin, Like Putin, Like Trump

The United States of America defeated Communism by being a nation of diverse ideas and opinions. Debate and compromise have been the strength of our country’s political system. After the fall of Soviet Russia, the idea of open discussion led to chaos in the new Russia. In less than a decade, Vladimir Putin rose to power and built a system of government that was a return to Soviet Russia in all but the name.

Trump is following the example of Lenin and Putin in his attempt to establish a Soviet-style government in our country using the Republican party as his version of the Communist party. If he is successful he will essentially be handing the defeat of the United States of America to Putin and Soviet Russia, 27 years after the fall of communism.

The Sad Life of a Russian Troll (Печальная жизнь русского тролля)

26 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Branding, Business, Communication, Donald Trump, Economy, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, jobs, labor, Language, Life, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Random, Respect, Russian influence, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Technology, Travel, United States, US History, Vladimir Putin, Voting, Website, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

fake identities, fake news, GOP, Russia, Russian, Russian Troll Farms, Soviets, Troll Farms, Trumpsters, USSR, Vladimir Putin, Web Brigade

It is a statement of life in Russia when one of the best jobs to be had is employment to write fake news stories, deceive people, and attempt to create chaos in other countries. Russian Troll Farms, or Web Brigades, as they refer to themselves, tell us more about Russian life, than about Western gullibility. What follows is my own fake story of an interview with a Russian Troll.

Troll – a mythical creature in folklore living in caves or hills or under bridges as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having a very ugly appearance.

Living Large in Russia: Condos in St. Petersburg

Interview With A Russian Troll

[NOTE: Some language may be inappropriate for young readers.]

Interviewer: What’s your job? (Кем вы работаете?)

Russian Troll: I learned to speak English so I could be paid to agitate and influence people in the United States to vote for politicians like we have in Russia. (Я научился говорить по-английски, чтобы мне могли заплатить за то, чтобы агитировать и влиять на людей в Соединенных Штатах, чтобы голосовать за таких политиков, как у нас в России.)

Interviewer: How does that help Russia? (Как это помогает России?)

Russian Troll: It doesn’t, but it makes the Americans suffer like we have to suffer in this shithole country. (Это не так, но это заставляет американцев страдать, как мы должны страдать в этой стране.)

Interviewer: Why do you do it? (Почему ты это делаешь?)

Russian Troll: I live in Russia. How else can I pay the bills? (Я живу в России. Как еще я могу оплатить счета?)

Interviewer: The economy of the United States drives the economy of the rest of the world. If you’re successful, aren’t you afraid of a worldwide economic disaster? (Экономика Соединенных Штатов стимулирует экономику остального мира. Если вы добились успеха, разве вы не боитесь мировой экономической катастрофы?)

[Language warning]

Russian Troll: Don’t tell me about disaster until you’ve seen the crappy place where I live in the middle of winter. Fuck the Americans. Fuck the rest of the world. They all celebrated when Americans landed on the Moon. They all celebrated when the Berlin Wall fell. Fuck them! (Не говори мне о бедствии, пока не увидишь дерьмовое место, где я живу в середине зимы. Ебать американцев. Трахайте весь остальной мир. Все они отмечали, когда американцы высадились на Луну. Все они праздновали, когда упала Берлинская стена. Трахайте их!)

Interviewer: What about your children? How will your work help them? (Как насчет ваших детей? Как ваша работа поможет им?)

Russian Troll: Who cares? Did anyone care about me when I was a child? For the last twenty years no one cares, so why should I care? (Какая разница? Кто-нибудь заботился обо мне, когда я был ребенком? За последние двадцать лет никто не заботится, так зачем мне это волновать?)

Interviewer: You mean the last twenty years when Vladimir Putin has led your country? (Вы имеете в виду последние двадцать лет, когда Владимир Путин привел вашу страну?)

Russian Troll: Exactly!…No, wait. YOU TRICK ME! (Quickly looks around) No, Putin has been good. I mean Putin has been great. Great! Putin is a great leader! (Точно! .. Нет, подожди. ВЫ ТРЕТЬЕ МЕНЯ! Нет, Путин был хорош. Я имею в виду, что Путин был замечательным. Большой! Путин – великий лидер!)

Interviewer: What does a Russian troll do after they leave the Farm? (Что делает русский тролль после ухода из фермы?)

Russian Troll: First of all, we are not a Troll Farm. We are a Web Brigade! We fight a war against the Free Countries of the World! We will bring them to their knees! Second, when I finish here I will be rich! I will never have to work again! I will move to America and be a…how you say,…big?, BIG, yes?, I will be a big man! You will know me by my shiny red sports car! (Прежде всего, мы не Ферма Троллей. Мы – веб-бригада! Мы ведем войну против Свободных стран мира! Мы поставим их на колени! Во-вторых, когда я закончу здесь, я буду богат! Мне больше никогда не придется работать! Я перееду в Америку и буду … как вы говорите, … большой?, БОЛЬШОЙ, да ?, Я буду большим человеком! Ты узнаешь меня своим блестящим красным спортивным автомобилем!)

Trump’s Tariffs Are For Putin

25 Sunday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in 1968, All Rights Reserved, Apollo, Business, College, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Exploration, Government, History, Honor, labor, NASA, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Russian influence, Saturn V, Space, Trade deficit, United States, US History, US Space Program, Vladimir Putin

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

China, Donald Trump, enemies, Putin's thesis, revenge, Russia, Russian espionage, Russian troll farm, Russian trolls, Soviet, Soviet space program, Soviet Union, tariffs, thesis, trade war, USSR, Vladimir Putin

Everyday Donald Trump proves his actions are guided by, or primarily for, Vladimir Putin. Anyone asking why is Trump pushing for tariffs on steel and aluminum against China should really be asking, “What’s in it for Putin?”

Vladimir Putin’s Trump Card

It should be noted that Vladimir Putin’s motivations are better understood if a person understands his background.

Vladimir Putin: A Soviet KGB Agent With A Grudge

Space Race

The USSR launched Sputnik 1 three days before Putin’s fifth birthday. He was six when Luna 1 became the first human object to leave Earth’s orbit. On his seventh birthday, Luna 3 transmitted the first images that human’s had ever seen of the far side of the Moon. He was almost eight when the Soviets put the first animals into space and safely returned them on Korabl-Sputnik 2 (known as Sputnik 5 in the USA.) He was eight when the Soviets sent Venera 1 to Venus followed by the first man in space on Vostok 1, followed by the first human to spend over 24 hours in space on Vostok 2.

From age nine to age fifteen, Putin saw his country continue to beat that United States in space with the following achievements: [Source: Wikipedia]

USSR Space Race Achievements

1962: First dual manned spaceflight, Vostok 3 and Vostok 4
1962: First probe launched to Mars, Mars 1
1963: First woman in space, Valentina Tereshkova, Vostok 6
1964: First multi-person crew (3), Voskhod 1
1965: First extra-vehicular activity (EVA), by Aleksei Leonov,^[18] Voskhod 2
1965: First probe to hit another planet of the Solar system (Venus), Venera 3
1966: First probe to make a soft landing on and transmit from the surface of the moon, Luna 9
1966: First probe in lunar orbit, Luna 10
1967: First unmanned rendezvous and docking, Cosmos 186/Cosmos 188.
1968: First living beings to reach the Moon (circumlunar flights) and return unharmed to Earth, Russian tortoises and other lifeforms on Zond 5

It was the Golden Age of the USSR.

When Putin turned sixteen his country’s leadership in space was suddenly lost to the United States. The world cheered as Apollo 8 took the first men around the Moon in December of 1968. Then the world held it’s breath as Neil Armstrong stepped onto the Moon in July of 1969. Everything Putin’s country had accomplished in space exploration in a decade was eclipsed by the United States of America in less than a year.

Vladimir Putin’s 1975 Thesis

Vladimir Putin studied law in college, but his thesis was focused on economics. The title of his thesis was, “The Most Favored Nation Trading Principle in International Law.” In his thesis, Putin clearly establishes the importance of USSR’s raw materials:

Mineral and raw materials represent the most important potential for the economic development of the country.

Translated from Vladimir Putin’s 1975 Thesis

He noted the need for Soviet extraction industries to compete with the Western world:

…which could compete as equals with the transnational corporations of the West.

Translated from Vladimir Putin’s 1975 Thesis

And the need for the government to do everything necessary to help the extraction industries compete:

…the state must assist the development of processing industries based upon the extraction industries in every way.

Translated from Vladimir Putin’s 1975 Thesis

Putin knew in 1975 the critical role the Soviet natural resources would play in the advancement of the USSR. The world trade of raw material is central to Putin’s plan for his country.

KGB For Life

Putin: KGB for Life

Immediately after he graduated, Putin joined the KGB. He was taught German and his cover was to be an interpreter. Putin had a front row seat to the fall of Communism from his station in East Germany. For the second time in his life, he watched his country be humiliated while the West celebrated.

He continued to work as a KGB agent after the fall of the Berlin Wall. He moved back to Russian and joined the University he graduated from to scout for new KGB recruits. While he claims to have resigned his position in the KGB, he has never done anything in his life that hasn’t been directed in some way to defeating his enemies. Putin is not a politician, he is a tactician.

Trump’s Tariff Fixation

It is clear that Donald Trump is under the influence of Vladimir Putin. Putin groomed Trump for decades and now it’s paying off. Russia cannot compete with its raw materials in the world market unless something drastic happens, such as a major trade war. Trump’s behavior on tariffs is leading to exactly what Putin desires.

For Putin, it’s a perfectly staged economic and political win for Russia. It advances the sale of Russia raw materials and humiliates his arch enemy, the United States. It is payback for the space race and the fall of the USSR. All thanks to Donald Trump.

Saturn V’s F-1 Engine: The Monster That Made USSR Cry

24 Saturday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in 1968, About Reno, Aging, All Rights Reserved, Exploration, Generational, Government, History, Honor, NASA, Nevada, Politics, Pride, Relationships, Reno, Saturn V, Science, Space, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

booster, F-1 engine, Moon, Moon landings, Moon rocket, N1, NASA, NK-15 engine, Rocketdyne F-1 engine, Saturn V, Soviet Union, Soviets, space race, USSR

When Vladimir Putin was a young man he was witness to his country’s space program being eclipsed by the United States. There are many reasons that the United States won the space race with the USSR, but Rocketdyne’s Saturn V F-1 engine was the element that the Soviet space program couldn’t replicate. It was a rocket engine that has no practical use for piddling around in Earth orbit. The F-1 is the top shelf engine of space exploration.

The massive F-1 engines of the Apollo Saturn V first stage booster.

Who Are Those Guys?

If there was a moment when the Soviet engineers said in wonder, “Who are those guys?,” it was when they saw the first massive Saturn V blast off using only five engines. They were working on a heavy-lift rocket that used 30 rocket engines in the booster phase. The idea that a Moon rocket could be designed using only five engines was laughable.

The USSR attempted four launches with their version of the Saturn V rocket called the N1 rocket. All four attempts failed. The Saturn V rocket had 13 successful launches in 13 attempts. One rocket (unmanned Apollo 6) had vibration issues and failed to make the desired orbit, but the launch was successful. NASA and its contractors crushed the Soviet Moon rocket in performance and reliability.

Comparing Watermelons To Sour Grapes

The Soviet N1 Moon rocket used the NK-15 engines on the first, or booster stage. Compared to the Apollo Saturn V F-1 engines, the USSR effort was similar to strapping a bunch of bottle rockets together to lift a person off the ground.

Each of the 30 NK-15 engines could lift about 1,500 kilonewtons or kN (1 kilonewton equals 224.81 pounds of force) compared to a single F-1 engine thrust of 7,000 kN. The total thrust of the first stage of the Soviet N1 Moon rocket was 45,400 kN, which was significantly greater than the Saturn V’s booster thrust of 35,100 kN and the N1 Moon rocket was 215,000 kg (480,000 lbs.) lighter.

The USSR 30 NK-15 engine design

However, the N1 required four stages compared to the Saturn V’s three-stage rocket, and the N1 booster stage could only burn for 125 seconds, while’s United States booster stage burned for 168 seconds. The big difference was the size of payload that the Saturn V could deliver to the Moon. USSR’s N1 could only put a 23,500 kg payload (51,800 lbs.) out of Earth orbit to the Moon, while the Saturn V could send a 48,600 kg (107,100 lbs.) payload.

The Rocketdyne F-1 engine was responsible for powering everything needed for a Moon landing and safe return off the surface of the Earth and it did it better than any other rocket engine in the history of space exploration.

GOP Disease: Say It, Then Apologize

23 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Assault Weapons, Communication, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Ethics, Generational, Government, Gun control, Gun Extremists, habits, Honor, Information Technology, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, racism, Respect, Russian influence, Second Amendment, Social Media Relations, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Carl B. Nett, character, CIA, Donald Trump, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, Kentucky, NRA, Secret Service, Secretary of State, Tweet, Twitter, United States, values, Violence

Republicans have a consistent problem. They first say what they are thinking…and then they apologize for it. It’s the GOP disease. In incident after incident a Republican office holder, or a Republican candidate will say something that is completely inappropriate and then smirk. They are proud of it. Then when it becomes national news, they suddenly grow a conscience and apologize for the remark…some of the time.

Former CIA Turned GOP Candidate Jokes About Killing Opponent

The most recent incident to make national news is when a Republican candidate for Kentucky’s Secretary of State, Carl B. Nett, office suggested in a tweet that he could use an anti-NRA pin for a target if his opponent would move the pin closer to the center of his body.

The tweet itself is disturbing. What is more disturbing is that Nett is a former CIA and Secret Service agent. He was one of the people that our country entrusted with the use of deadly force because he supposedly was trained to control his impulses. As a former agent, the expectation is that he knows that killing someone is not a joking matter.

Nett has caused the world to question the training and discipline of our country’s CIA and Secret Service agents. He has made all of them look like cowboys out for a party with little or no self-control.

Trump As A Model

Donald Trump has been the model for Republicans in breaching intellectual and civil boundaries of behavior with his practice of saying anything that comes to his mind. Trump reveals his inner thoughts and expresses them in a diarrhea-type flow of violent, subhuman, and racist comments.

Unfortunately, Trumpsters love Trump because he says what they are thinking. That, in itself, is also disturbing.

Qualifications To Be a Public Servant

When someone says what they think, that is honesty. Honesty is good; however, when honesty reveals that the person is of a vile nature, they are not qualified to be a citizen of this country, let alone elected to public office. An apology is not the measure of a person. The person is measured by hu’s* actions.

Nett’s apology was a self-serving statement that he’s just a normal human:

I now join the long list of imperfect human beings with “foot-in-mouth” disease. Once again, I apologize to Congressman Yarmuth and his family and ask for their forgiveness.

— Carl B. Nett (@realCarlNett) March 20, 2018

Nett is not a normal human. Hu is representative of the nature and character of the Republican party. Hu’s values are Putin-like values that belong to a society of corruption and terror. We don’t need the excuses of people who can’t respect the ideals our country. We need people of character. Republicans are not those people. Carl B. Nett is a case in point.

[*Hu’s: a gender-neutral pronoun for his/her. Hu: a gender-neutral pronoun for he/she.]

Three Steps For Solving the Assault-Type Weapons Problem

16 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Assault Weapons, Crime, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Reno, Second Amendment, The Tipping Point, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

assault rifles, assault weapons, Assault weapons ban, gun, Gun control, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, gun rights, gun violence, guns, Second Amendment

Some people are saying that assault-type weapons genie is out of the box. Their belief is that the ban on assault-type rifles can never be reinstated. They fear that collection of assault weapons may involve violent confrontations with gun extremists. There is a way out of this mess caused by letting the assault weapons ban expire. It involves three steps.

Designed to Kill Without Aiming – Semi-automatic Mossberg-MMR

STEP ONE: Reinstate the ban on assault-type rifles

All future sale, trade, and/or gifting an assault-type rifle, including all rifles with an automatic and/or semiautomatic firing function, would be banned in the United States of America. These weapons would not be allowed to be imported, nor purchased outside the United States and brought into the country.

STEP TWO: Voluntary Surrender of Assault-type Rifles

Any current owner of an assault-type rifle would have the option of surrendering hu’s* weapon to local law enforcement. Those guns would need to be secured or destroyed.

STEP THREE: Conditions of Ownership of Assault-type Rifles

Condition One: Registration

Anyone with peaceful intent should be willing to comply with the registration of all assault-type weapons. Those that fail to register their automatic and semi-automatic weapons shall be considered to have a violent intent. They will face stiff fines and possibly prison. Registration will also consist of a background check, regardless of whether one was done when the owner purchased it.

Assault-type weapons cannot be sold to anyone else without approval from the local law enforcement agency. That agency will be required to perform a background check.

CONDITION TWO: Insurance

Anyone owning a weapon in question must obtain and maintain a one million dollar liability insurance policy. This is similar to the liability policy required to own a car. Failure to do so will require forfeiture of the gun and a significant fine and possibly prison.

CONDITION THREE: Compliance With the Second Amendment

Per the Second Amendment, an owner of an assault-type rifle must join a State National Guard and submit to regular training and duty as long as they own the weapon. Use of the weapon shall be regulated by that State’s National Guard, including the determination of mental and physical qualifications of use of such weapon.

(*’Hu’s’ is a pronoun meaning ‘his’ and/or ‘hers.’)

NRA is Not a Gun Safety Organization

14 Wednesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, All Rights Reserved, Crime, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Health, History, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Recreation, Reno, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace, Wildlife, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Colorado, Colorado Division of Wildlife, FL, Florida, gun, Gun control, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, gun rights, gun violence, Hunter, Hunter's Safety Course, hunting, mass murders, mass shooter, Mass shootings, Parkland, Student Protests

I obtained a National Rifle Association (NRA) card in 1967 (updated in 1975.) Actually, it was a hunter’s safety card. It was a new requirement for a Colorado Department of Natural Resources hunting license for anyone born after 1949. I earned it by attending a hunter’s safety course sponsored by the NRA. I was nine years old, and as I recall, I was among the first children to go through the course. That was when gun safety was important to gun owners and to the NRA.

Today’s NRA: Put Guns In the Reach of Children

Now the NRA is a nonprofit group with a focus on increasing the profits of weapons manufacturers. Safety is in conflict with its primary mission. Now its goal is to propagandize weapon ownership and instill fear in the mind of the public. The concept of promoting safe use of firearms has been replaced with promoting unsafe firearm practices. Protecting the sale of assault-type weapons and putting a gun in a room of children, for example.

In 1967 good gun ownership included making sure guns were unloaded when coming back into town. Guns and people are never a good combination. In 2018 the NRA philosophy is driven by one concept…How can gun manufacturers sell more guns? The new philosophy can be seen in every aspect of NRA activity. Guns in schools, guns at home, assault rifle for everyone, no background checks, etc.

… the NRA is a powerful political organization that lobbies for gun rights and opposes the restriction on firearms by gun laws … the National Rifle Association has become one of the most powerful organizations that has great influence at the political level.

The National Rifle Association website

Voice of Common Sense

Today at 10 am, students around the country will remember last month’s mass school shooting that killed 17 people. Gun extremists are quick to focus on the minor transgression of students walking out of class and ignore the murder of children by a man with a gun that no one should own. If this protest was for the NRA, gun extremists would be voicing the right of Free Speech, but only a fool would protest for the NRA.

Voices of common sense about gun ownership are always seen as a threat to gun extremists. I once spent over an hour discussion common sense gun ownership with two gun extremists who were on a campus seeking to recruit more gun extremists. My debate with them became pointless. It was the same NRA indoctrination over and over. They have to defend themselves against an imaginary enemy. When I asked them what allows them to be judge, jury, and executioner, their retort was, “I have a right to defend myself.”

Assault-type Rifles Are To Kill People

One of the demands of today’s student protests is to reinstate the ban on assault-type rifles. Anyone who has hunted knows that an assault-type rifle is not compatible with shooting game animals. The first step in discharging any firearm is to aim at your target, and be sure there is nothing in front or behind that might be hit by the bullet. Once fired, a gun will jerk and require it to be aimed again. An assault-type rifle is designed to spray bullets in rapid fire, and if configured with a ‘bump’ stock, or illegally retrofit to be an automatic rifle, aiming is not possible.

The comments I have heard from owners of assault-type rifles is that they are ‘fun to fire.’ This leads me to believe that the man who committed the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas was on a ‘thrill kill’ that was triggered by having so many weapons of mass murder available. He simply wanted to use them for their intended purpose.

The NRA’s position is that assault-type rifles should be available for anyone who can afford one. Their reason is simple; more weapons instills fear in others, which in turn sells more weapons. There is no downside to mass shootings in regard to the NRA’s goals.

Am I Safe?

After finding my Hunter’s Safety Card I contacted one of the Colorado Wildlife offices and asked if my card from 1967 or 1975 was still valid. They are, but that doesn’t make me a safe gun owner. A card doesn’t make you a safe gun owner. Nor does a gun make you a safe gun owner.

Why Are Conservatives Anti-Society?

13 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Business, Conservatives, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Economy, Education, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Higher Education, History, Housing, labor, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, racism, Religion, Reno, Respect, Second Amendment, Taxes, United States, US History, Voting, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

anti-society, Conservatives, Donald Trump, GOP, Gun control, gun extremists, gun laws, guns, hu, Immigration, immigration laws, Republicans, society, taxes, Trumpsters, Women

The conservative agenda is not society friendly. It is designed to benefit few and ignore the rest. The ideology of conservatism is based on an idea of keeping what is perceived to be good and avoiding risk-taking in the future. It assumes that there will be winners and losers so life is about making sure they are the winners.

Fear and Hate are the Entrees for Conservatives

Religions As Safe Harbor For Conservatives

Religions are typically conservative because most religions are built on a paradigm of preserving past traditions. Even the Christian religion is filled with rules and rituals that preserve the thinking of the past and are resistant to change. This is why so many Christians identify themselves with conservative thinking.

The idea that everyone is worthy and equal is usually rhetoric in religions mixed with a condescending effort to help those less fortunate. Often religions and conservatives blame the less fortunate for their own problems. They are the losers and a conservative often consoles hu’s* conscience by making offerings or volunteering to help the less fortunate.

A Liberal Perspective is in Direct Conflict with a Conservative

A conservative, by definition, is focused on preserving what they believe with the assumption that any other belief is irrelevant. It is easy to understand why anyone who has a liberal perspective is worthy of ridicule to a conservative because liberals tend to have a less cynical view of humanity.

Conservatives are driven by fear and self-preservation, while liberals are driven by hope. Conservatives need to believe that they are under threat. Examples of conservative thought consumed by selfishness and fear are:

Taxes

All efforts in a society should be of direct benefit to the person paying taxes. Any money spent for the welfare of others is a target to conservatives and considered a waste of money. Conservatives often use rare examples of waste to ridicule spending for the benefit of less fortunate.

Gun Ownership

Conservatives use their fear of humanity to base a belief that a system of laws and impartial judgment are not effective. Conservatives believe that they should have the right to judge the actions of another person and execute them without trial. To the conservative, the term ‘defense’ justifies the instant execution of an unarmed person based on hu’s fear of that person.

Immigrants

Conservatives typically interchange hu’s racists beliefs with issues that target a particular race. Even though there is no significant immigration problem in the United States, conservatives manufacture a fear that immigrants are a threat. Immigration enforcement targets non-Caucasian races and typically ignore Caucasians.

Women

Historically women have endured a subservient role in society. Conservatives want to preserve that subservient role and consciously and unconsciously act as if women are a lesser gender. In religion, a fear of women has pushed them into a role of service to men and the church.

Conservatives Anti-Society

The problem with conservative ideology is that the fear and hate of non-conservatives places them as the adversary of society. It divides the population, often along the lines of race and power. In their mind, everything is an ‘us-versus-them’ battle regardless of a lack of evidence.

This attitude impacts the effectiveness of our society as the concept of a few winners is at the expense of the rest of the population.

(*’Hu’s’ is a pronoun meaning ‘his’ and/or ‘hers.’)

Are We Ready For Gender Neutral Language?

12 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Discrimination, Education, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, History, Honor, Language, parenting, Pride, Public Image, racism, Relationships, Respect, Traditional Media, United States, Universities, US History, Women, Writing

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

definite article, English, Female, femininity, French, Gender, gender bias, German, hu, hu's, Italian, male, masculinity, nouns, pronouns, Spanish, transgender

In an age where gender issues are rising to the surface, language demonstrates the depth of gender discrimination. In centuries of the spoken and written word, a division between male and female became part of communication. The only logical reason for creating this division of masculinity and femininity in language is to create bias.

Language begins the division of the genders

Implied Gender Embedded in Language

English has shed most of the masculine and feminine constructs; however, pronouns remain a roadblock to gender-free writing or speech. Many other cultures face an almost impossible task of removing gender from their language. Masculine and feminine are embedded deep into the language of Spanish, French, Italian, German, and many other languages.

In many of these languages, not only the pronouns are gender defined, but the definite article (the, a) is gender-linked to the noun, which is also gender-linked.

Table 1.0 Gender Differences in Different Languages

Gendered Language Creates Social Issues

There are many studies that consider the issues of gender in languages. Most demonstrate an insidious bias caused by using words to define a person or thing as male or female. One significant issue of gendered language involves people who are transgender. Defining a person as male or female is offensive and harmful to a person whose physical form does not match her or his internal perception. It also creates undo awkwardness with people who are androgynous in physical appearance.

Gender is an unnecessary problem as there is almost never a need to establish masculinity or femininity using language. The reasons for using gender in writing and speech were attached to a patriarchal society where men were assumed to be dominant. Keeping gendered language is a failure to let go of the past and move forward.

Introducing ‘Hu’

I can’t change how people use language but I can experiment using a non-gendered pronoun in my writing. Because the he/she/him/her/his/hers pronoun is unnecessary, I am going to use the word ‘hu‘ for a non-gendered pronoun and ‘hu’s‘ as a non-gendered possessive pronoun.

Are we ready? We will never know unless we start somewhere. I’ll be interested in your reactions.

Time To Stop Changing Time? Why We Need Daylight Saving Time All Year

11 Sunday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, All Rights Reserved, Astronomy, Daylight Saving Time, Economy, Generational, Government, habits, Health, History, Lessons of Life, Mental Health, Recreation, Reno, Science, solar, Space, Technology, Travel, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

clock, Daylight Saving Time, DST, Standard Time, time change, Year Round

Many people dislike the two days of the year we go to or revert from Daylight Saving Time (DST.) It requires changing the clocks and adjusting to the new rhythm of our activity related to the rise and set of the Sun. It is annoying and, as a species, annoyance is a prompt for finding a solution. Perhaps it is time to stop changing time.

A Problem of Degrees

We should recognize that the length of day is only an issue for those living between 30° and 70° latitude. The length of day within 30° of the equator doesn’t radically change from summer to winter. Above 70° latitude, the Sun sets for weeks or months during the winter and there are not many people living that close to the poles.

For those living between 30° and 70° latitude, there is an undeniable problem. Reno, Nevada, USA is at 39° north latitude. At the summer solstice, the day is almost 15 hours long and sunrise is at 5:30 am under Daylight Saving Time. If we did not have DST, the sun would rise at 4:30 am.

A Diurnal Vespertine-Adapted Species

In an agrarian economy, working in the field is easier during daylight hours. In that situation, time is relative to a solar schedule; however, in an interactive urban economy, working in shops and offices is more suitable for a common clock schedule.

After artificial electric light became the standard, and after the population moved into cities, we became a diurnal, vespertine-adapted species. Most of our country’s population works during the daylight hours and participates in non-work activities in the evenings. Today, most people are not active before six in the morning, but they remain active until 10 pm or later.

Sunrise before 6 am disturbs the typical sleep patterns of humans, and light later into the evening is more suitable for evening activities. Daylight Saving Time creates a favorable environment for a later sunrise and more sun in the evening.

Daylight Saving Time Year Round

Standard Time was traditionally based on the position of the Sun at High Noon. That approximately divided the daylight into Morning and Afternoon. We no longer use High Noon as the foundation of Standard Time; however, it is an artifact of a primarily agrarian economy. Daylight Saving Time was used to adapt the clock to human behavior as we moved from the farms to more urban living.

Time is a human invention. It should serve the needs of humans. It would seem it is time to stop punishing humans with Standard Time and remain on Daylight Savings Time for the entire year.

Three Myths That Gun Extremist Believe

09 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Crime, Donald Trump, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Health, History, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, racism, Reno, Russian influence, Second Amendment, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

District of Columbia v. Heller, gun, Gun control, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, gun rights, gun violence, guns, NRA, Second Amendment, Supreme Court

Gun Extremists have been fed a steady diet of misinformation by the NRA. Decades of crafting a lie have resulted in gun owners being one of the most misinformed groups in the history of the United States. When you talk with an NRA gun extremist you hear the following statements:

1. Gun Extremist’s Myth versus FACT:

The Second Amendment gives me a constitutional right to own an assault rifle and the government can’t take away my guns.

False. The Second Amendment begins with “A well regulated militia…” That is the focus of the amendment. Everything that is stated afterward is subject to the topic of a well regulated militia. Well regulated clearly means that the government is expected to regulate gun ownership.

Guns are not trophies

2. Gun Extremist’s Myth versus FACT:

The Supreme Court ruled that the government can’t take our assault rifles away.

False. The Supreme Court ruled in The District of Columbia v. Heller that the government can’t ban handguns in the home, providing the person meets the qualifications required to own a gun. The Supreme Court specifically stated that more dangerous weapons could be banned from public use.

In fact, a ban on assault rifles existed from 1994 until 2004 when Congress failed to renew the ban. The ban was constitutionally legal.

3. Gun Extremist’s Myth versus FACT:

I have a right to defend myself with a gun.

False. If you use a gun to injure or kill someone it must be proven that it was in defense. It is true, that in many states if someone enters your home it is considered allowable for a homeowner to shoot that person even if they are unarmed. The law does not give a person the right to be judge, jury, and executioner.

However, it is rare that a gun death is a legitimate ‘defensive’ act. In 2013, of 33,636 deaths due to “injury by firearms,” 21,175 (63%) were suicides and 11,208 (33%) were homicides, 505 (1.5%) were deaths due to accidental or negligent use of a gun. We are the most well-armed nation in the world and over 97% of all gun deaths were not because someone killed the bad guy.