Most of you are familiar with the fairy tale about the goose that laid a golden egg.

It did so on a regular basis and brought a steady flow of wealth to its owner until it was disemboweled to get to the source. It died and produced no more golden eggs.

When the new Soviet government came into power in Russia and was struggling for its existence in the early 1920’s it turned to its arch philosophical enemy, Capitalism, for survival.

The new government, against all the principles of Communism, understood that without trade from the Western countries, the so called Capitalist Imperialists, and without investment from within, its own capitalists, it was doomed to collapse.

In short, Capitalism saved Soviet Communism from failure.

Fifty years ago George F. Kennan, who had been an ambassador to the Soviet Union, wrote a book, “Russia and the West Under Lenin and Stalin” in which he said:

“The Western governments came to hate the Soviet leaders for what they did. The Communists, on the other hand, hated the Western governments for what they were regardless of what they did.”

The Chinese Communists under Mao Tse-tung professed the same goals, that is the complete destruction of Capitalism within their country.

With the publication of Mao’s “Little Red Book” in 1966, “The Quotations”, we saw the reduction of a powerful and huge country to that of a life-style that existed in Medieval Europe.

China eventually learned that it required Capitalism to support its productive output. Today the US is deeply in debt because of the lesson that China had learned, that is, Communism does not work and without Capitalists to invest the profit that they have accumulated, China would become a country of peasants living only off the land.

Most people in the US and the rest of the world don’t seem to understand that without Capitalism, that is the reward for the effort of production and reward for the risk of investment of the surplus of production, an economic system will eventually wind down and collapse.

Nothing can long survive without nourishment—whether it is a plant, an animal or an economic system. We are presently seeing the effects at this time in the US of banks being overly cautious in their policies of loaning money to potential home and real estate investors or business ventures. Our economy is dying.

The absolute goal as stated by the true Communists is the total destruction of the Capitalist system.

Although the words “Capitalism” and “Imperialism” are used interchangeably by many people they are not the same thing. US Imperialism has not existed for a long time but the word is still used to attack the only economic system that can expect to be viable.

There are many in the US and most of the other countries of the world who want to see the Capitalist system replaced by Socialism and Communism.

That, in my opinion, is disemboweling the Goose that Lays the Golden Eggs.

Copyright: John W. Malenda June 2010

The one problem that she had though is that she was in a minority.

Her brother was a Marine on duty in Afghanistan. Her father had been a Marine in Vietnam and her grandfather had survived the winters and the bullets of Korea while in the Army.

Miss Smith, because of family history, was a “Conservative”.

One morning on her way to school she heard something on the radio that disturbed her very much. She decided to try an experiment with her class.

“Who would like to pretend to be a General…..” but before she could finish her sentence little Willy Simpson was running to her desk waving both arms yelling, “Me. Me”

“You didn’t let me finish. We are going to play a little geography game today and the General will be the most important General today.

He will have to make a serious decision because he will be Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Do you know what that means, Willy?”

“No Miss Smith.”

Willy was far from being the brightest kid in the class but she always appreciated his enthusiasm so she said, “OK Willy. You will be the General.”

She handed Willy a piece of string with a lot of knots in it.

“Willy, each one of those knots represents a thousand miles on the globe on the table over there.

Everyone who has watched TV must know where Iran is so Willy, put one end of the string in the center of Iran and hold it there. Move the string over to the Capitol of the United States, Washington, DC.

How far is it from Iran to our Capitol?”

Willy stretched out the string and said, “About six and a half knots.”

“Very good”, Miss Smith said, “That’s about six and a half thousand miles.”

“Now Willy, holding the string look at the globe and tell me what country is about two and a half knots from Iran.”

Willy looked and said, “Poland.”

“Very good Willy. Can you see the city that the string passes over?”

“Warsaw.”

“And what’s just past Poland?”

“The Baltic Sea.”

“Now General, suppose that someone in Iran wanted to shoot an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile, an ICBM, at our Capitol and you wanted to shoot it down before it hit Washington would you want to shoot it down over the United States or somewhere else?”

“Probably somewhere else,” Willy answered.

“Willy, an ICBM travels very fast, about 15,000 miles per hour, and in ten minutes after it was fired it would pass over Poland. What would you do?”

General Willy answered, “I would ask the Polish people to shoot it down.”

Let’s get back to reality. If an ICBM fired from Iran fell short of it’s projected distance to Washington it would land in either New England or a bit further on, New York.

Do we have an anti-ballistic missile defense system in the US? According to the media we do not and will not until near the end of this decade.

Did we have an anti-ballistic missile system that could have been deployed in Poland?

Even a third-grader could figure that one out.

Copyright: John W. Malenda April  2010

I hear it sometimes many times a day, from everyone who thinks about running for Town Council up to and including the President of the United States.

“We need clean and affordable energy.”

Let me tell you something about energy. It comes at a price.

We generate electricity in a number of ways but in all but one we need to crank a generator. The exception is a solar panel, the photovoltaic conversion of sunlight energy into a flow of electrons.

We crank generators with a turbine powered by steam, water, wind or burning fuel—the jet engine.

With the exception of wind and water all the other systems use steam made by heating water by burning hydrocarbons or heat generated by the decomposition—fission—of nuclear material.

Generators turned by jet engines burn either gas or burn refined jet engine fuel.

Those are our only options. The dream of generating heat from fusion, the squeezing together of hydrogen atoms to form helium with the byproduct of heat only occurs on stars. The best minds on the planet have been attempting to achieve this for decades but have failed. The temperatures and pressures required are not attainable on a continuous basis.

Now to some of the reasons why we will not have “clean and affordable energy.”

The best deal that you can get regarding energy is to hang your wash on an old-fashioned clothesline but your neighbors and environmentalists don’t want to see your underwear flapping in the breeze like Tibetan prayer flags.

Neither do they want to see wind turbines against the skyline on their hills.

Neither do they want to see solar panels on your roof or in your yard if there is not enough sun that hits your roof.

Neither do they want to see dams on the rivers.

Neither do they want to see power plants and transmission towers on their favorite beach.

So to keep saying, “We need to find new ways to generate clean and affordable energy”, accept the fact. There are no new ways.

KNOW WHAT WE NEED?

“Peace on earth, goodwill toward men.”

Looks good on a Christmas card but it ain’t gonna happen anymore than we will get affordable and clean energy.

It’s esthetics versus utility.

It’s wishes versus reality.

When you are done chewing your nails, go to Whole Living Today to get your blood pressure back down to normal.

A puppy takes a lot of care. You must feed it, make sure it has water, take it for walks, play with it, teach it to interact socially, take it to the vet and spend a lot of time with it.

Yesterday I opened a can of worms that I have been trying to avoid since I started this BLOG–politics and Global Warming.

They are intertwined.

Now that I have, I must follow through on a series of related articles….or look like an idiot.

In short, yesterday, “I Bought a puppy”.

The planet is warming. There is enough good data to support this at the present time. We do not know if it will continue to warm up or if it will start to cool.

So far this winter some seriously cold weather and snow have been seen around the world.

In the 1970’s the fear was that the planet was cooling.

As I said yesterday it is cyclic and unpredictable.

There are greater amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere today than there had been as shown by measurements in core samples from ice.

Whether the Sun started the warming cycle a couple of centuries ago and people are adding to it now is a possibility.

Warming of the northern regions releases carbon dioxide from the permafrost along with a far more effective greenhouse gas, methane.

Glaciers are melting. That too is verifiable.

Iceland and Greenland are volcanic in nature and some of the glacial melting can be coming from the rock under the ice and not just the atmosphere.

Science is full of symbols and numbers. Symbols frighten some people but they are “shorthand” for abstract concepts: momentum, energy, force etc.

Numbers indicate magnitude or quantity.

I will try to keep these at a minimum

Most people have heard of “Carbon Dating”.

There are three isotopes of carbon. An isotope has the same chemical properties but different internal configuration for an element.

Carbon 12 is the most common form of carbon and about 99 % of all carbon exists in this state.

Carbon 13 makes up most of the rest.

But there is also Carbon 14, a radioactive form that disintegrates to about half of itself in 5600 years. This is termed, “Half Life”.

Carbon is the major constituent of plant life and it is from this that we derive all of our common energy sources, our hydrocarbons: firewood, coal, oil and natural gas.

No matter what hydrocarbon that we burn to extract the energy that the sun originally put into it, the by-product is water and carbon dioxide.

By measuring the residual carbon 14 contained in ice samples we can determined when that carbon was captured and stored.

Ice core samples do indicate that the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere has been increasing during the period of the industrial revolution and  the increasing population on the planet.

It seems obvious to conclude that people are the cause.

Maybe but maybe not.

If the Sun triggered this warming trend agriculture would spread and populations would grow because there is more food to support them. It may be a corollary rather than a cause.

I am in total agreement that we must reduce carbon emissions but not catastrophically destroy our ability to lead reasonably comfortable lives until we really understand what is happening.

I will continue with this subject in a series of articles that deal with power generation, electric vehicles and nuclear energy.

“Stay tuned for the next thrilling episode of…. Will the World Turn?”.

HURRICANES AND SUCH

I started this BLOG in November 2007 and it has been my intention to terminate it after two years. It’s not because I am bored with it or that I do not have sufficient material to continue it.

Life is full of choices and there are many priorities that clamor for attention:

E-mails have to be read and answered, jokes need to be forwarded, the garbage must go out, wood for the fireplace must be brought in, snow must be shoveled and toilet paper rolls must be replaced when empty.

People say, “I wonder where the time went.”

That’s the answer. It was chewed up by trivia.

Anyway, the reason for this post is the goading by a very interesting and well-researched book that my granddaughter gave me recently, “Hot, Flat and Crowded” by Thomas L. Friedman. It is loaded with good information and a “must read” by Liberals and Conservatives alike.

I do take exception, however, that the author implies that all the ills of the modern world are the result of the policies of the United States in many areas.

First, a digression. I wrote and published  a novel in 1994, DESTINATIONS, which has been out of print for years.

I am seriously planning to have it reprinted soon. I have had to make no changes to the original after all these years because I feel it is more current today than when I wrote it.

In the story, I have a character ask the following:

“Who’s telling you what and why?”

This is something that everyone should ask themselves when they are presented with an argument that they are somewhat wary of.

Back to Friedman’s book. On page 147 I read something that made me take notice and I quote now:

“Many climatologists believe that Katrina’s unusual ferocity was fed by the warmer waters in the Gulf on Mexico, which, they believe, are partly attributable to global warming.”

Friedman stated that after World War II the United States increased its industrial output and as a result generated much more CO2, the major cause of Global Warming. This production increase, he claims, accelerated after the fall of The Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War.

Being the scientific skeptic that I am, I said to myself, “Wait a minute, what about other hurricanes before WWII?”

During the 1930’s the United States was in a deep depression and industrial production along with CO2 emissions would have been way down.

This led me to look at hurricanes of epic proportion.

The Labor Day Hurricane of 1935, was a Category 5 hurricane. The Hurricane of 1938 was also a Category 5 hurricane. These occurred before there had been significant  CO2 generation. Hurricane Camille in 1969 was a Category 5 hurricane. Hurricane Gilbert of 1988 was a Category 5 hurricane. Hurricane Andrew of 1992 was a Category 5 hurricane.

Katrina, however, came ashore as a Category 3 hurricane.

It was not a “ferocious hurricane”. The damage that it caused was not by high winds but by a poorly maintained levee system and people living below water level.

Significant rain along the Mississippi River basin could have created the same result without its being a hurricane.

What I am getting at is that the Hurricane of 1938 devastated New England without having traveled across warm Gulf water caused by the United States industrial CO2 pollution.

Now, my point is this. There is no question that the climate is changing. It does so on a daily basis. I have been keeping daily weather records for over 40 years because that is my nature; to observe and hopefully predict. As I stated in my first BLOG article, I am a scientist.

 The geological records of the planet shows the extremes of ocean levels that have occurred over time. These levels are a function of global warming and cooling. There is no argument there but the Earth’s temperature ranges are neither predictable as a function of time nor consistent in amplitude.

I live along the Connecticut coast. The railroad line from New York to Boston runs along this coast and a series of bridges had been built across the estuaries in Stonington, Connecticut that flow into Fisher’s Island Sound then into the Atlantic Ocean.

The clearance under these bridges leave barely enough room for small boats to pass under yet this clearance has been approximately the same during the past 100 years.

What does this mean? The oceans have neither risen nor fallen enough to cause a change in the clearance between the water level and the bottom of the bridge.

This is a “yardstick” cast in stone.

If this is true, then the ocean heights have not changed at Stonington, Connecticut, Samoa, Sri Lanka or Sicily.

People can say, “The beach used to be way down there but now the waves are lapping at my foundation. That proves that the ocean levels have risen.”

Wrong, that shows the effects of erosion at work.

In 1952, on the northwest shore of Oahu, Hawaii I have photos that show about 50 yards of beautiful sandy beach. When I returned in 1953, the beach was only about 20 yards wide with about a six foot drop to the water of hard black lava.

At the time, I asked one of the “locals” about it.

He said, “The sand comes and goes. It will come back.”

In 1954, the wide sandy beach was back.

He understood.

Fishermen who leave Chatham, Massachusetts on Cape Cod in the morning often must return in a different channel because the sand bars shift daily.

Let’s not confuse beach erosion with ocean heights. 

Before we become “Chicken Little” and scream that the sky is falling down, let’s get some solid data that does not favor some scientist’s job, does not support a political party’s agenda and does not allow someone to make a fortune at taxpayer’s expense.

Keep an open mind and a clear head and ask:

“Who’s measuring temperature and where?”

“Who’s measuring ocean heights and how?”

And finally, “Who’s telling you what and why?”

DICTATORSHIP

There are two steps necessary for an impending dictatorship

The first is to silence opposing views. Today it can be achieved by controlling the media: television, radio and the Internet.

Any system through which those with opposing views can gauge the extent of dissention in society must be eliminated.

Revolutions are not undertaken by a single person and unless the strength of the opposition can be evaluated with respect to the strength of the government no action is taken.

The second is to disarm the people to prevent forceful opposition.

The method employed throughout the world has been the registration of weapons

. This provides the government with not only the number and types of weapons but a list of where they are located.

Enforcement of this is through very severe penalties if unregistered weapons are used or otherwise found.

After registration, there are several means of control.

The most dramatic and the least likely to be tolerated in a free society is confiscation.

A more subtle and gradual process is ownership permit fees and taxes.

These can be raised to such levels that people voluntarily give up their weapons.

            Finally there is the elimination of manufacture and the distribution of ammunition.

            I may be wrong but it appears that we are presently on that course.

             I have sent this out as an E-mail to many of my friends and quite a few disagree with me.

Thankfully we live in a free country where I can express my opinions

   I receive many e-mails asking why I don’t post articles to this log more often.

The reason is that like most people I find that the trivia that one encounters in everyday living consumes time that could be better spent in creative pursuits

   I write when I encounter either ignorance or stupidity so overwhelming that I have no choice.

   Ignorance can be excused but stupidity is something else entirely.

   People who have not been exposed to fact, for whatever reason, can be excused but when facts are available and well-circulated then those who, again for whatever reason, chose not to accept those facts are truly stupid.

   Stupidity has no place in civilized countries. The people therein have had access to schools, libraries and recently to TV and the Internet.

    There are countless documentaries on TV with well-developed time-lines of the evolution of the surface, forests and landscape of our planet. The rise and fall of ocean levels and the formation and melting of glaciers has been a continuous process.

   Core samples taken from ponds indicate, from very durable pollen samples, the plants that grew in the areas and the temperatures and moisture necessary for those plants to exist.

  The planet Earth has warmed and cooled for eons before there were people, power plants and automobiles.

  Even a fifth grade level geology book would enlighten people to this fact so why are so many people resistant to truth?

   What is it going to take to convince those people who make decisions that can wreck the economies of the entire planet to change conditions that are unchangeable?

   Is it politics alone that so blinds people or is it a more sinister hidden agenda that is determined to revert us back to living in caves and eating roots and berries.

  There are no more new caves and many many more people today so expect violent competition for survival.

CORD                  1929-1937

CROSLEY           1939-1952

DUESENBERG   1913-1926

ESSEX                  1919-1932

HUDSON             1910-1957

KAISER               1945-1956

NASH                   1916-1957

PACKARD           1899-1958

STUDEBAKER   1902-1966

When these fine American cars could no longer compete in the market, they simply went out of business.

Where was their  Uncle Sam when they needed him? No one bailed them out

When the horse and buggy could no longer compete with the automobile, the buggy manufacturers closed their doors also.

The United States did not collapse.

If a company is unable to produce any product competitively then it should fail.

Subsidizing failure seems to be a trend in the US today but it creates the expectation of continuity in enterprises that make incompetent decisions.

There is a connection between conservatism and greed but it is not an absolute “A=B”.

One can be ‘conservative’ (as I am) and not be greedy (as I am not).
Greed stems from conservatism but is not necessarily the end product. Too much conservatism is greed.

In other words, I want to be self-sufficient and in so doing I must accumulate enough of the  ‘implements’ to do so. In primitive times this meant arrowheads, wood,  skins and dried meat.

Today it is money. I feel money is a vehicle (a bartering medium) that will allow me to trade for those things that lead to my survival.
It has never been my goal to accumulate more than I feel is necessary to meet the goal of survival in a modern world– a world of taxes and shelter and fuel (energy) and transportation and food and some left over for pleasure.
Without some pleasure life becomes merely existence.

Those who accumulate simply with that as a goal are indeed greedy and that breeds resentment in those who are truly deficient.
This leads to extreme ‘liberalism’  using the vehicle of guilt to take from the truly greedy….and give to perhaps the less greedy.

How much is ’sufficient’? Who evaluates how much pleasure one is entitled to?
How much money do the apparently  deficient allocate to pleasure that gives them the appearance of insufficient means of survival?

My grandfather’s favorite expression was, “Moderation in all things.”

In short be conservative (self-sufficient) but not greedy.

   The reader I refer to has a site definitely worth visiting: www.blog4brains.com.

   I guess that’s what it takes. We are simply humans and it seems that once we get into a rut we tend stay there. It is the easy way out. Someone needs to poke us with a stick.

   Anyway, the reader mentioned that we have a neglected freedom, the freedom to fail.

  Our present American culture has become very–I won’t call it success oriented–but ‘anti-failure’ oriented.

  I first experienced this in 1968 when I had moved into a new neighborhood and a neighbor invited me to his home for a visit.

   The basement had been made into a very impressive game room and while touring the house his young son challenged me to a game of table tennis.

   The boy was very good but I managed to win a very close game.

   Both the kid and the father significantly cooled and the visit ended fairly quickly.

   When we went outside, the father said angrily, “You were supposed to let him win!”

   Having been a Boy Scout, an Assistant Scoutmaster, an Explorer Advisor and a Cub Scout Committee Chairman I was very surprised by that attitude.

  During my entire life I had been conditioned to survive and one only survives by giving everything in you to every task. The concept of intentional failure was beyond my comprehension.

   Since then we have seen the system of survival replaced by the system of ‘preservation of self-esteem’

  School children are not permitted to fail. No matter how poor their performance they still graduate from high school barely able to read, write a meaningful sentence or give you back the correct change.

  We do have the ‘freedom to fail’. If you manage your personal finances or your business in a manner in which you cannot survive then it is necessary that you fail.

  I am fairly certain that if you cannot compete in business or in the academic fields in China, India or Russia then you have the freedom to fail.

  No one will bail you out if you are a proven loser.

  Why should they?

   If we continue to place a higher value on  self-esteem than on performance, we, as a country, can expect to fail. It is, after all, one of our freedoms.