Wednesday, January 02, 2013

2013 Chore List


Emily

Daily

  • Homework
  • Exercise (30 minutes, vigorous) - running, continuing progress toward 4 miles in 32 minutes by June.
  • Brush Maggie
  • Ready for School
    • Papers given to parents to be signed or reviewed
    • Folder, snack, agenda, homework, and wordstudy book in backpack
    • Backpack put in closet
  • Clear Table
  • Ask if there is anything you can help with

Reminders

    • Piano

Rebecca

Daily

  • Set Table
  • Feed Maggie (2x)
  • No Misbehaving
  • Ready for School
    • Papers given to parents to be signed or reviewed
    • School work in folder
    • Folder, snack, agenda, homework, and wordstudy book in backpack
    • Backpack in closet
  • Homework
    • Math
      • IXL or multiplication/division exercises
    • Typing (15minutes)
    • Word Study - spelling, synonyms, antonyms
    • Reading (20 minutes)
  • Ask if there is anything you can help with

Reminders

  •  Exercise

General

  • Laundry
  • Dishes
  • Dusting

  • Teresia

    Daily

    • Get girls ready for school
    • Put dishes away (morning)
    • Laundry
    • Exercise
    • Dinner
    • Dishes
    • Ensure sink is empty (evening)
    • OOTM

    Weekly

    • Vacuuming
    • Dusting

    Jamil

    Daily

    • Work
    • Innovation Blog
    • Multiplication practice with Rebecca
    • Exercise
    • OOTM

    Weekly


  • Allergy Shots
  • Something from the punch list

  •  Family

    Weekly

    • Clean bathrooms
    • Vacuum House
    • Walk Maggie

    Thursday, March 19, 2009

    Remaking the auto industry

    I don't understand why the auto industry has continued on this slow march into oblivion. I don't understand why there is any political will to help perpetuate this sick industry? The industry executives promised Congress a plan to fix the problem, but what did they give them? Minor tweaks to product lines. You can't fix a failing industry with small tweaks, it requires big changes.

    Since the auto executives don't have the imagination to offer up anything big I will throw out something. Support it, laugh at it, do what you will. If nothing else, it offers something truly different.

    The Problem: Profitability in the auto industry is tied to new vehicle sales. As a result, the car industry is constantly trying to convince us to buy new cars. To keep consumption up, the auto industry tries to keep prices low (granted, they're not very good at it). To keep prices low they use the least expensive materials possible. In this system, the auto industry has an incentive to design obsolescence into the car. I don't have evidence for it, but the word from the rumor mill is that a typical car is designed for 100,000 miles. The average person will drive more than 700,000 miles in a lifetime.

    Why is this a problem? First, it creates waste. All those old cars eventually make it to scrap piles, and new iron, oil, etc... must be harvested to make new cars. Second, the materials and engineering needed to make significant gains in efficiency without sacrificing performance are very expensive. It is unrealistic to think the average person will be able to spend $100,000+ on a vehicle that might last ten years.

    So what is the auto industry to do? To fix the auto industry we will have to change the revenue stream from a sales driven model to a value or transportation driven model. We have to create the incentives for the industry to focus on providing high value, not low cost, e.g. long-lasting vehicles designed to meet the challenges of today, not those of the 1950s. We would also have to recognize and respect the personal relationship people have with their cars. I believe we can do this while improving our standard of life.

    A proposed solution:
    1. Design vehicles (engines, frames, suspensions, etc...) to last a very long time (40+ years).
    2. Separate vehicle design into two major components (the drive frame and the coach).
    3. Abandon the idea of personal vehicle ownership.
    In my proposed system, all vehicles are leased from the manufacturer. In return, the manufacturer performs all maintenance and guarantees the vehicle will always be maintained at factory standards. However, the coach would be designed as a separate "bolt on" component which could be owned by the driver. This isn't very radical; it is similar to the way cars were originally made. With a two component system, maintenance would be a breeze:
    • The driver would pull into the local maintenance facility (a lot like a car wash)
    • The coach would be lifted from the drive frame
    • Then the coach would be dropped onto a new drive frame
    • The driver leaves to do... whatever
    • Maintenance on the drive frame is performed without impact to the customer.
    • Maintenance cost is built into the lease. So there is no additional charge to the driver.
    • Maintenance time drops to 5 or 10 minutes, and you don't even have to get out of the car.

    This maintenance would be provided by the local car dealer (transformed from an unpleasant sales organization to the frontline maintenance provider, backed up by regional maintenance facility.

    In this system, the auto manufacturer derives income from a continued relationship with the driver. The only way to keep that relationship is to provide high value and quality of service. Further, auto manufacturers would have an incentive to make cars last, which would require fewer resources. A longer car life also has the benefit of allowing the manufacturer to amortize the cost of expensive materials like carbon fiber over an extended period. Such materials could significantly increase car efficiency. The customer benefits from having a predictable expense, eliminating the need to maintain the car, and improved quality of service (one would hope). If the coach design was based on a standard that ensured portability you could easily switch from one transportation provider to another, while keeping your personal coach.

    This system would also allow flexibility that can never be achieved in the current system. For instance, if you lived in the city you could lease a car with an electric drive frame. City driving is well suited to electric cars. Then, when you decide to take a nice long trip up the coast, you could switch out your electric frame for a gas/diesel/natural gas frame. When you return from your trip you would slip back into your electric frame. As new technologies are introduced, new drive frames can be built without negative impact to the customer. The old drive frames can be retooled for the new technology.

    I admit the approach is not without pain points. Any significant change requires adjustment, and some sectors will be hurt. If such a system were ever realized it would mean the end of the local repair shop. Depending on your mechanic this might be good or bad. Another result would be that fewer cars would have to be built, which would result in a reduction in the number of automotive plants and employees.

    Our disposable lifestyle has moved us from the high quality approach of our grandparents. It has led to waste, and the abdication of our place as the world's primary creator of wealth. Refocusing the auto industry toward high value, and real dependability could be the first step toward reversing that trend.

    Friday, February 01, 2008

    Campaign Finance Reform


    With John McCain looking like the leader in the Republican primaries, I've participated in several discussions regarding campaign finance reform. I am not a fan of the McCain-Feingold law. In my estimation it flies in the face of the first amendment. So what would work better?

    I believe the solution is simple.
    • All contributions must come from the area the candidate seeks to represent e.g...
      • a Presidential may raise funds from anywhere in the U.S.,
      • a U.S. Senate candidate may raise funds from the state,
      • a Congressional candidate may raise funds from the congressional district,
      • etc...
    • All contributions must be attributed and public (the truth shall set you free).
    • There should be no limit on the size of individual contributions.
    • Corporations may not contribute in any manner. No money, no jets, no commercials, Nothing. The electoral process is for citizens. Corporations should be free to lobby politicians, but should have no input in elections.
    These simple rules would place the power in the hands of the citizens, where it belongs. It is not the Federal Government's place to dictate to the people who they may support or to what extent they may support them. We created the government, we own the government, and we can replace it.

    Thursday, January 12, 2006

    Self Serve Lasik

    So… There I was minding my own business, preparing dinner. Was I in a rush? Yes. Was the oil too hot? Yes. Was it stupid? Absolutely. But it’s an ill wind the blows no good.

    I had a feeling the skillet was too hot, so I made sure I had the lid handy. Perhaps I should have turned the heat down. Regardless, the oil started to boil the second it hit the pan. Ofcourse, that’s bad. So, to cool the oil down, I thought I’d hurry up and gets the steaks in. You can do some stupid things when you’re in a hurry. Normally I would place the steaks in the skillet so they fall away from the cook (me). This time I just slapped it in and, naturally, it fell toward me. As the steak fell into the searing, boiling oil, the oil ignited.

    Let’s recap… Boiling, burning oil in an overheated skillet. Falling steak.

    Splash

    All I could think, when the burning oil reached my right eye, was “Ouch! Fire? Ouch! Get the lid!, Ouch! Stupid, Ouch!”. I think I actually saw the drop of oil careening toward my eye (I think they call it a false memory). Anyway, I put out the fire and ran to the bathroom. Sure enough, there was a distinct haze in the lower third of my vision in my right eye. I could also see a whitish area on my cornea, where the oil got me. I earn my living through reading and writing. So, I freaked.

    At the Emergency Room they told me it was a minor injury. As they predicted, the mind bending pain subsided in a couple days. After three weeks of eye drops, and healing, I noticed something strange. I had decided that I should start wearing my glasses. I have had a mild astigmatism since the mid ‘90s. I don’t have to wear my glasses to read, and frequently don’t, but wearing them helps with eye fatigue and would have prevented this catastrophe. But when I wore my glasses I couldn’t focus properly. Naturally, I assumed my right eye was having some new problem that would shortly make me blind. That afternoon (I already had an appointment with the opthamologist that day) I mentioned it to my doctor. So she checked both my eyes. We were both amazed to learn that the trauma had actually corrected the astigmatism in my right eye, and had returned it to perfect 20/20 vision.

    The down side is that I can't use my glasses, but I still have one defective eye. The upside is, I'm making fried chicken tonight ;^)

    So, if you know anyone interested in investing in “Scott’s Steak & Lasik”, just let me know.

    Tuesday, December 27, 2005

    Workout

    Dec 27, 2005
    Type - Run

    Miles - 5.1
    Cal - 678 (1 1/2 King Size Hershey Bars)
    AHR - 175
    Time - 44:20

    Monday, December 19, 2005

    Pensions and dependence

    With the United Airlines pension debacle, and GM's financial problems, I think it is time for us all to talk about the value of pensions. To start the conversation, I'll throw out the first hand grenade...

    The Federal Government should outlaw pensions, and those old world companies that still have them should move to 401(k) plans. That should get some people started ;-)

    In the early 20th Century we were all convinced that huge corporations were here to stay. Back then it made sense to have a pension. No one trusted the financial markets, and MegaCorp (your employer) would be there for eternity, to nurture you well into your old age. Ever expanding markets and profits would ensure that the enormous financial base on which pensions rely would be ever-present.

    WRONG!!!

    The only way a person can reasonably(?) depend on a pension is if it has the coercive power of the government (and taxation) behind it. Governments are the only entities that do not rely on the market for their existence. But even THAT won’t protect the weary pensioner. Governments are subject to a force more fickle than markets, Politics.


    Under government sponsorship, beneficiaries are at considerable risk. Social Security is a good example of this. The U.S. Government will continue to exist, barring some catastrophic war or revolution. Therefore Social Security will continue to make payments, as long as it is politically expedient. What happens when it is no longer expedient? It is possible that young people could start voting and decide they don't like the existing system. What happens if the underlying tax-base shrinks below a sustainable level (which is happening all over the industrialized world)? Either the system collapses or the payments are reduced to the point of irrelevance. So much for security.

    Private corporations do not have the luxury of sovereignty. Corporations (even huge juggernauts like GM) are not immune to the forces of economics. Relying on pensions in the modern context is crazy. Any corporation that continues to push employees into a pension plan does not have the best interests of their employees or stockholders in mind. It leads to unreasonable risk for everyone involved.

    In the 70s there were myriad stories of pensioners going hungry because their 'fixed income' was eviscerated by inflation. My Great Aunt was one of them. Now we hear of corporations being brought to their knees under the burden of pensions. At GM there are people facing the real possibility of being laid off before they reach retirement. Those employees will walk away from a lifetime of work with nothing. Those employees that are lucky enough to make retirement will face an uncertain future. Any system that creates such interdependence is detrimental to all parties.

    With a 401(k) you always get to take your money with you regardless of the reason for severing employment. It doesn't matter if you're laid off, downsized, quit, or whatever. They give employees much more flexibility and portability. Employers also benefit because their commitment ends with making any matching contributions, and hiring a reputable firm to manage the plan.


    Self-reliance is the American way. It makes better citizens and simplifies our lives. We should embrace it. 401(k)s aren't perfect, but they beat dependence.

    Santa 2005



    On December 10th we ventured out to visit Santa. The girls were excited, but we arrived just before Santa's break. So, Mommy and the girls went Shopin' while I stood watch in the Santa line. It was pretty boring until I struck up a conversation with an Irish Aussy. We had a nice long chat about bringing children up, how boys are more physical than girls (and how you shouldn't try to make boys act like girls). We had a bit of a disagreement about whether or not the total ban on firearms was a good idea. I, however, was right! Oh well, after an hour of standing and talking, the girls finally talked to Santa. The day was a success and we were all tired. So we went home satisfied.