Clean, potable, water is no longer - even in the USA - a commodity that is in such great abundance that we need take no care over the amount that we use.
One of the most wasteful uses of drinkable water is flushing toilets.
We could recycle "grey" (shower, dishwasher, laundry etc.) water for flushing but that is difficult and inconvenient. As a result, only die-hard environmentalists are willing to make such efforts.
In an attempt to address this waste of water, the Federal Government (National Energy Policy Act of 1995) has mandated that all newly sold toilets shall use no more than 1.6 gallons of water per flush. By comparison, toilets in the 1950s used as much as 7 gallons per flush although, by the 1980s, design improvements had reduced that to 3.5 gallons.
There are a couple of major problems here. The first is that, even with a carefully designed system, multiple flushes - as many as three and sometimes more - are often required to get the task completed. Second, even when the system does work, the severely reduced water flow tends to create significantly increased risk of blockages in the drain from the house to the main sewer. There are quite a few studies showing that the anticipated water savings are simply not being realised and that homeowners and renters are highly dissatisfied with the performance of these devices.
In Europe, however, water saving toilets have a simpler system with two separate flush buttons. One provides a low quantity flush for circumstance when there is little in the way of waste material to be disposed of. The other button provides a full scale, old fashioned, effective flush when it is needed.
Although the European system does not have the potential to save as much water as a high-tech American low flow toilet - and it relies on the user to select the appropriate flush quantity - it works better while saving more water in the long run and keeping the customers happy.
Sadly, this situation is just another example of the best - at least the theoretical best - being the enemy of the good. The Department of Defense, as well as other advocates of the best at any cost, almost always finds that the so-called best comes with cost overruns, is delivered late, and doesn't actually work very well.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Monday, July 28, 2008
Gas Prices - High is Relative
If you think that gas prices are high, at around $4.00 per gallon, consider the situation in England.
The price of regular gas in London is 1.19 but that is in British Pounds per liter.
Since a British Pound buys $2.00, and there are about 3.785 liters per gallon, the actual price of a gallon (U.S.) of gas is about $9.01.
There are very few mini-vans on the road and, in three days in London, I saw exactly one SUV. People think quite hard about what they drive and how far they go.
Although it would still be nice to pay less than $2.00 per gallon, we should be grateful - not whiners - that we are only paying $4.00.
I will send a report from Sweden next week.
The price of regular gas in London is 1.19 but that is in British Pounds per liter.
Since a British Pound buys $2.00, and there are about 3.785 liters per gallon, the actual price of a gallon (U.S.) of gas is about $9.01.
There are very few mini-vans on the road and, in three days in London, I saw exactly one SUV. People think quite hard about what they drive and how far they go.
Although it would still be nice to pay less than $2.00 per gallon, we should be grateful - not whiners - that we are only paying $4.00.
I will send a report from Sweden next week.
Friday, July 25, 2008
The Evolution of Language - Gay
The meaning of words is capable of radical changes.
As a teenager in the 1960s, I more than once remember my mother, as I was headed out ot a party, telling me to have a "gay time" or asking on my return if I had had a "gay time".
She was not making a reference to my sexual orientation which, for the benefit of those who may be confused, is straight. In those days - really not so long ago - the term "gay" meant, among other things, happy, carefree, and lighthearted.
Now the term is used, almost exclusively, to refer to homosexuals and references to such periods as the Gay Nineties (1890s) are more and more likely to be misinterpreted by those whose knowledge of history is lacking.
It's a pity that a delightful and useful word was hijacked by a pressure group but, on the other hand, it is perhaps fair to allow gays a shorthand term to replace some of the uglier epithets that used to be common.
As a teenager in the 1960s, I more than once remember my mother, as I was headed out ot a party, telling me to have a "gay time" or asking on my return if I had had a "gay time".
She was not making a reference to my sexual orientation which, for the benefit of those who may be confused, is straight. In those days - really not so long ago - the term "gay" meant, among other things, happy, carefree, and lighthearted.
Now the term is used, almost exclusively, to refer to homosexuals and references to such periods as the Gay Nineties (1890s) are more and more likely to be misinterpreted by those whose knowledge of history is lacking.
It's a pity that a delightful and useful word was hijacked by a pressure group but, on the other hand, it is perhaps fair to allow gays a shorthand term to replace some of the uglier epithets that used to be common.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Ugly
When I become Dictator of the World, there will be a very substantial 'Ugly Tax'.
The Ugly Tax will apply to ugly boats (particularly), ugly cars - specially those that look like blobs on wheels, ugly houses, and ugly buildings of all sorts. Particularly offensive are lines that do not flow. Ugly clothes will be taxed too but not ugly people since they are not able to control their appearance and I would not wish to be a shill for the plastic surgery trade.
Starving artists will be hired as part time tax assessors but they will need to be careful lest their own work be classified as "ugly" too!
To be serious, it is really sad that there are so many designers and architects who are desperately trying to be original but lack the talent to provide something that is both useful and pleasing to the eye. Perhaps they should take into consideration this quote from Tom Stoppard in his play 'Artist Descending a Staircase':
Skill without imagination is craftsmanship and gives us many useful objects such as wickerwork picnic baskets. Imagination without skill gives us modern art.
The Ugly Tax will apply to ugly boats (particularly), ugly cars - specially those that look like blobs on wheels, ugly houses, and ugly buildings of all sorts. Particularly offensive are lines that do not flow. Ugly clothes will be taxed too but not ugly people since they are not able to control their appearance and I would not wish to be a shill for the plastic surgery trade.
Starving artists will be hired as part time tax assessors but they will need to be careful lest their own work be classified as "ugly" too!
To be serious, it is really sad that there are so many designers and architects who are desperately trying to be original but lack the talent to provide something that is both useful and pleasing to the eye. Perhaps they should take into consideration this quote from Tom Stoppard in his play 'Artist Descending a Staircase':
Skill without imagination is craftsmanship and gives us many useful objects such as wickerwork picnic baskets. Imagination without skill gives us modern art.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
How dumb can a company get?
I own a 2006 Plymouth Town and Country mini-van which came with a factory installed GPS navigation system.
So far, so good.
Since the maps provided are, as a result of age and incomplete surveys, less than totally accurate, I recently called Mopar (Chrysler's parts division) to order an update. Being told that an update was available, I asked the price. $199 was the response.
My first thought was that these people must have got a D- in economics 101. My second thought was that it is not a surprise that Chrysler (www.chrysler.com) is in deep financial trouble in spite of - or perhaps because of - being owned by a well known private equity group (Cerberus Capital www.cerberuscapital.com) which employs many very bright, very well paid, people.
Since all of the costs to update the maps had been incurred prior to my telephone call and the marginal cost to send me the disk is about $2.00 plus shipping, for which I would have been charged, their price can only be described as an attempt to "rip off the rubes." I am not too bright but I am not that stupid and I can manage with slightly out of date maps. I am also old enough to be able to read a map (MapQuest www.mapquest.com works just fine) so I can get by without sending Mopar $199.
Had they asked for $30, I would have paid for the convenience but, as it is, Mopar/Chrysler doesn't have any of my money and, worse for them, they have an annoyed customer on their hands.
I doubt that I will ever buy another of their products.
So far, so good.
Since the maps provided are, as a result of age and incomplete surveys, less than totally accurate, I recently called Mopar (Chrysler's parts division) to order an update. Being told that an update was available, I asked the price. $199 was the response.
My first thought was that these people must have got a D- in economics 101. My second thought was that it is not a surprise that Chrysler (www.chrysler.com) is in deep financial trouble in spite of - or perhaps because of - being owned by a well known private equity group (Cerberus Capital www.cerberuscapital.com) which employs many very bright, very well paid, people.
Since all of the costs to update the maps had been incurred prior to my telephone call and the marginal cost to send me the disk is about $2.00 plus shipping, for which I would have been charged, their price can only be described as an attempt to "rip off the rubes." I am not too bright but I am not that stupid and I can manage with slightly out of date maps. I am also old enough to be able to read a map (MapQuest www.mapquest.com works just fine) so I can get by without sending Mopar $199.
Had they asked for $30, I would have paid for the convenience but, as it is, Mopar/Chrysler doesn't have any of my money and, worse for them, they have an annoyed customer on their hands.
I doubt that I will ever buy another of their products.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Layoffs or Buyouts?
Well managed companies are able to identify which of their employees are stars, which are decently good enough, and which are really not up to the standard required.
Jack Welch, when he was CEO of General Electric, was famous for a ruthless application of this process: employees were categorized as top 20%, middle 70%, and bottom 10%. His prescription was to fire the bottom 10% which is harsh but effective.
Poorly managed companies are often overstaffed and react to the presence of idle or unqualified employees by hiring more people. Lack of knowledge - and cowardice - prevents them from removing those who are not earning their keep.
As much to avoid making hard decisions as for any other reason, these companies often resort to "buyouts". That is, they offer substantial incentives, in cash or additional retirement benefits, to those who will leave voluntarily.
It is not hard to predict who will take the buyouts!
Those who are competent and who believe that they can get a comparable job elsewhere, will leap at the chance to leave with a significant payoff. Those whose skills and work ethic are marginal will, conversely, seize the opportunity to remain - and continue to contribute little.
As bad as a buyout is the "across the board layoff" which takes no account of the tasks facing the company or in which departments and subsidiaries the star employees can be found. It isn't always as bad, initially, as a buyout because it is cheaper and, also, some of the poor performers will be removed. On the other hand, the effect on morale is often devastating.
It is a cliche that good management is necessary to keep a company profitable and healthy. Unfortunately, good management is about dealing honestly with people and that requires courage - something that is often in short supply - particularly when addressing poor performance. The stars must be rewarded, the adequately ordinary must be developed, and the poor performers must be removed after a reasonable, although not lengthy, effort to bring them up to speed.
It is not easy to find courageous managers.
So, when you hear of a company engaging in buyouts, across the board layoffs, and other actions that indicate lack of courage, sell your shares because the company simply does not have competent management in place to flourish in the long term.
Jack Welch, when he was CEO of General Electric, was famous for a ruthless application of this process: employees were categorized as top 20%, middle 70%, and bottom 10%. His prescription was to fire the bottom 10% which is harsh but effective.
Poorly managed companies are often overstaffed and react to the presence of idle or unqualified employees by hiring more people. Lack of knowledge - and cowardice - prevents them from removing those who are not earning their keep.
As much to avoid making hard decisions as for any other reason, these companies often resort to "buyouts". That is, they offer substantial incentives, in cash or additional retirement benefits, to those who will leave voluntarily.
It is not hard to predict who will take the buyouts!
Those who are competent and who believe that they can get a comparable job elsewhere, will leap at the chance to leave with a significant payoff. Those whose skills and work ethic are marginal will, conversely, seize the opportunity to remain - and continue to contribute little.
As bad as a buyout is the "across the board layoff" which takes no account of the tasks facing the company or in which departments and subsidiaries the star employees can be found. It isn't always as bad, initially, as a buyout because it is cheaper and, also, some of the poor performers will be removed. On the other hand, the effect on morale is often devastating.
It is a cliche that good management is necessary to keep a company profitable and healthy. Unfortunately, good management is about dealing honestly with people and that requires courage - something that is often in short supply - particularly when addressing poor performance. The stars must be rewarded, the adequately ordinary must be developed, and the poor performers must be removed after a reasonable, although not lengthy, effort to bring them up to speed.
It is not easy to find courageous managers.
So, when you hear of a company engaging in buyouts, across the board layoffs, and other actions that indicate lack of courage, sell your shares because the company simply does not have competent management in place to flourish in the long term.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
It's a start...
As of October 1, Blue Cross Blue Shield - after years of tolerating, and paying for, too much really poor quality medical care - will join the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services in denying payment to hospitals that commit nine preventable medical errors.
The medical errors in CMS’ policy include objects left in a body after surgery, air embolism following surgery, blood incompatibility, equipment-associated infections, advanced pressure sores and hospital-acquired injuries, including falls and burns. In addition to those six, the Blues added three others: surgery on the wrong patient, surgery on the wrong body part, and wrong surgery.
That's a start and is likely to reduce the number of preventable errors. On the other hand, the National Quality Forum, a Washington-based coalition of employers and health care organizations, has actually identified twenty eight preventable medical errors. The sooner that all insurers decline to pay - for all of these errors - the better quality care we are likely to receive.
Delay is fatal. Why not cover all twenty eight errors immediately?
The medical errors in CMS’ policy include objects left in a body after surgery, air embolism following surgery, blood incompatibility, equipment-associated infections, advanced pressure sores and hospital-acquired injuries, including falls and burns. In addition to those six, the Blues added three others: surgery on the wrong patient, surgery on the wrong body part, and wrong surgery.
That's a start and is likely to reduce the number of preventable errors. On the other hand, the National Quality Forum, a Washington-based coalition of employers and health care organizations, has actually identified twenty eight preventable medical errors. The sooner that all insurers decline to pay - for all of these errors - the better quality care we are likely to receive.
Delay is fatal. Why not cover all twenty eight errors immediately?
Friday, July 11, 2008
Presidential Election 2008
Every now and then the presumptive candidates of the Republican and Democratic Parties take a break from hurling accusations of "flip-flopping" at each other.
During these breaks, they indulge in what can only be described as a competitive "pander fest" whereby each describes the multitude of goodies that will be distributed to favored groups by a beneficent Federal Government. What is entirely missing is any discussion of the hard choices that need to be made in the next four years: energy, education, health care financing, Social Security, Medicare, infrastructure, rogue states, the Middle East etc.
The fault is ours. We have allowed ourselves to become indulgent and selfish whiners to whom much must be given and from whom little may be asked. Addressing another generation, John F. Kennedy, in his Inaugural Address, made this oft quoted, but rarely acted on, statement:
And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country.
JFK demanded that we recognize the duties that complement our rights and the obligations that accompany our privileges. We will not long remain a great country if "gimmee, gimmee" replaces e pluribus unum as our national motto.
For those who think that government should be an endless cornucopia of benefits - whether earned or not - Thomas Jefferson also offers some valuable advice:
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
During these breaks, they indulge in what can only be described as a competitive "pander fest" whereby each describes the multitude of goodies that will be distributed to favored groups by a beneficent Federal Government. What is entirely missing is any discussion of the hard choices that need to be made in the next four years: energy, education, health care financing, Social Security, Medicare, infrastructure, rogue states, the Middle East etc.
The fault is ours. We have allowed ourselves to become indulgent and selfish whiners to whom much must be given and from whom little may be asked. Addressing another generation, John F. Kennedy, in his Inaugural Address, made this oft quoted, but rarely acted on, statement:
And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country.
JFK demanded that we recognize the duties that complement our rights and the obligations that accompany our privileges. We will not long remain a great country if "gimmee, gimmee" replaces e pluribus unum as our national motto.
For those who think that government should be an endless cornucopia of benefits - whether earned or not - Thomas Jefferson also offers some valuable advice:
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Rules for Life
An e-mail, attributing these 'Rules for Life' to Bill Gates, has been circulating for the last ten years. Snopes.com http://www.snopes.com/language/document/liferule.asp is quite clear about the correct attribution and history: it is a much edited and condensed version of an Op-Ed article written by Charles J. Sykes in the San Diego Union Tribune on September 19, 1996
As a summary of what you need to do to survive life without grossly inflated expectations, however, it is excellent and deserves to be republished frequently.
Rule 1 : Life is not fair - get used to it!
Rule 2 : The world won't care about your self-esteem. The world will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel good about yourself.
Rule 3 : You will NOT make $60,000 a year right out of high school. You won't be a vice-president with a car phone until you earn both.
Rule 4 : If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a boss.
Rule 5 : Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity. Your Grandparents had a different word for burger flipping: they called it opportunity.
Rule 6: If you mess up, it's not your parents' fault, so don't whine about your mistakes, learn from them.
Rule 7: Before you were born, your parents weren't as boring as they are now. They got that way from paying your bills, cleaning your clothes and listening to you talk about how cool you thought you were. So before you save the rain forest from the parasites of your parent's generation, try delousing the closet in your own room.
Rule 8: Your school may have done away with winners and losers, but life HAS NOT. In some schools, they have abolished failing grades and they'll give you as MANY TIMES as you want to get the right answer. This doesn't bear the slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.
Rule 9: Life is not divided into semesters. You don't get summers off and very few employers are interested in helping you FIND YOURSELF. Do that on your own time.
Rule 10: Television is NOT real life. In real life people actually have to leave the coffee shop and go to jobs.
Rule 11: Be nice to nerds. Chances are you'll end up working for one.
As a summary of what you need to do to survive life without grossly inflated expectations, however, it is excellent and deserves to be republished frequently.
Rule 1 : Life is not fair - get used to it!
Rule 2 : The world won't care about your self-esteem. The world will expect you to accomplish something BEFORE you feel good about yourself.
Rule 3 : You will NOT make $60,000 a year right out of high school. You won't be a vice-president with a car phone until you earn both.
Rule 4 : If you think your teacher is tough, wait till you get a boss.
Rule 5 : Flipping burgers is not beneath your dignity. Your Grandparents had a different word for burger flipping: they called it opportunity.
Rule 6: If you mess up, it's not your parents' fault, so don't whine about your mistakes, learn from them.
Rule 7: Before you were born, your parents weren't as boring as they are now. They got that way from paying your bills, cleaning your clothes and listening to you talk about how cool you thought you were. So before you save the rain forest from the parasites of your parent's generation, try delousing the closet in your own room.
Rule 8: Your school may have done away with winners and losers, but life HAS NOT. In some schools, they have abolished failing grades and they'll give you as MANY TIMES as you want to get the right answer. This doesn't bear the slightest resemblance to ANYTHING in real life.
Rule 9: Life is not divided into semesters. You don't get summers off and very few employers are interested in helping you FIND YOURSELF. Do that on your own time.
Rule 10: Television is NOT real life. In real life people actually have to leave the coffee shop and go to jobs.
Rule 11: Be nice to nerds. Chances are you'll end up working for one.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Wikipedia
A "Google" search on almost any topic will likely, in the top five results, return a reference to a Wikipedia article.
So far, so good.
The problem with Wikipedia is that anyone can post or edit articles - with almost complete anonymity - so there is no way of knowing whether the information is accurate or complete. Too many of the articles that I have reviewed lean far towards the trivial and many appear to be pushing a particular point of view.
Most users, unfortunately, accept what is written with little critical scrutiny. As a result, Wikipedia now has the potential to disseminate lies, misinformation, and propaganda in a way that few other media channels can.
Perhaps I am an old fogey but I consider that anonymously provided information should always be regarded with caution - if not suspicion. In addition, the wise words of one of my former clients come to mind: "you don't always get what you pay for but you rarely get more!"
So far, so good.
The problem with Wikipedia is that anyone can post or edit articles - with almost complete anonymity - so there is no way of knowing whether the information is accurate or complete. Too many of the articles that I have reviewed lean far towards the trivial and many appear to be pushing a particular point of view.
Most users, unfortunately, accept what is written with little critical scrutiny. As a result, Wikipedia now has the potential to disseminate lies, misinformation, and propaganda in a way that few other media channels can.
Perhaps I am an old fogey but I consider that anonymously provided information should always be regarded with caution - if not suspicion. In addition, the wise words of one of my former clients come to mind: "you don't always get what you pay for but you rarely get more!"
Friday, July 4, 2008
The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776
Today is July 4th when Americans celebrate the Declaration of Independence. Five years later the Revolutionary War effectively ended with the surrender of Earl Cornwallis's army on October 19, 1781 at Yorktown. The Treaty of Paris was signed in 1783.
Now, as then, we seem to have an overweening government that has forgotten that it works for the citizens (and seems not to recognize that quaint phrase "WE THE PEOPLE..." which begins the United States Constitution) and a Chief Executive who shows signs of thinking himself a reincarnation of H.M. King George III.
Just as a reminder, then, to King George Worthless Bush XLIII, together with his minions Cheney, Addington, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Gonzales and others (that's a slogan but irresistible!), here is the complete text of the Declaration of Independence:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
Now, as then, we seem to have an overweening government that has forgotten that it works for the citizens (and seems not to recognize that quaint phrase "WE THE PEOPLE..." which begins the United States Constitution) and a Chief Executive who shows signs of thinking himself a reincarnation of H.M. King George III.
Just as a reminder, then, to King George Worthless Bush XLIII, together with his minions Cheney, Addington, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Gonzales and others (that's a slogan but irresistible!), here is the complete text of the Declaration of Independence:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Where are our scientists and engineers?
In a column, published on June 26 in the Washington Post http://tinyurl.com/4gxmlt , George F. Will laments the fact that there are too few H1B visas to allow foreign born scientists and engineers to remain in the USA after they have received PhD degrees from American Universities.
He misses the point. As Mr. Will writes:
"Two-thirds of doctoral candidates in science and engineering in U.S. universities are foreign-born."
The real question is why Americans are unwilling to study these subjects.
Admittedly these disciplines are hard but surely there are many who, with the appropriate encouragement, would be willing to tackle the job. The 1958 National Defense Education Act, passed shortly after the Soviet Union launched the world's first artificial satellite (Sputnik), helped a generation of American scientists and engineers with their education costs.
Now that the costs of higher education have escalated to such a level that few students or families can afford it without incurring an almost crippling load of debt, there is an urgent need for change.
Rather than treating all college students as equally worthy of [insufficient] financial assistance, perhaps it is time to discriminate in favor of those Americans who study the hard subjects. We need scientists and engineers - more than lawyers, bureaucrats, hedge fund managers and speculators, or designers of really ugly cars, boats, and buildings - to ensure the continued creation of wealth in our country.
He misses the point. As Mr. Will writes:
"Two-thirds of doctoral candidates in science and engineering in U.S. universities are foreign-born."
The real question is why Americans are unwilling to study these subjects.
Admittedly these disciplines are hard but surely there are many who, with the appropriate encouragement, would be willing to tackle the job. The 1958 National Defense Education Act, passed shortly after the Soviet Union launched the world's first artificial satellite (Sputnik), helped a generation of American scientists and engineers with their education costs.
Now that the costs of higher education have escalated to such a level that few students or families can afford it without incurring an almost crippling load of debt, there is an urgent need for change.
Rather than treating all college students as equally worthy of [insufficient] financial assistance, perhaps it is time to discriminate in favor of those Americans who study the hard subjects. We need scientists and engineers - more than lawyers, bureaucrats, hedge fund managers and speculators, or designers of really ugly cars, boats, and buildings - to ensure the continued creation of wealth in our country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
