Thursday, March 31, 2016
Sunday, March 27, 2016
Real Estate Crash
The Real Estate Crash can be effectively blamed to the Federal Reserve. It's chairman at the time, Alan Greenspan did not realize the effects of free money. The chairman, had set interest rates at a very low rate for a sustained period of time. The banks took advantage of this opportunity and started loaning money out to the rest of the world and the U.S and were making enormous profits (they payed out pennies in interest). They also began in very risky behavior, if they failed, they wold be bailed out and the low interest rates made the money "free". One of their risky behaviors included inappropriate lending, they would loan huge sums of money to homeowners who could never pay it back. In combination with the average homeowner who started to engage in risky behavior as well (because of the low-interest rate incentives), the homeowner started taking mortgages on their house to buy other houses. Why? Because these low interest rates created an asset bubble, as a result the house prices were rising due to speculative behavior. However, the Central Bank could have aggressively increased interest rates in the beginning, but they didn't. Since there was investments in finance rather than industry, the bubble could no longer be sustainable, the economy was failing. When it crashed, the price of houses fell dramatically, their investments failed, and the houses were foreclosed and the banks were bailed out.
-Please see Capitalism and bailout and "too big to fail" posts to learn more.
*NOTES:
President Bush had actually supported this practice via his affordable home ownership policy. He thought this was god because more citizens were owning homes. They actually didn't own homes but a excessively high debt.
Many other Federal Reserve members new it was a bubble and low interest rates had created it. However they did not stop it because they sticked to policies that were flawed. They assumed it was impossible for speculative behavior to occur in houses.
Friday, March 25, 2016
Dodd Frank Act
The Dodd Frank act was created to address the bank's inappropriate behavior which played a key role in the financial Crisis. Please read: Real Estate Crash AND Are we a truly Capitalist Society? before/ after this post. These details need not be explained.
The importance of the Dodd Frank Act was to say:
You screwed up pretty badly in 2008. We don't want to have a $ trillion bailout again to prevent a whole market collapse. Thus, we need to create an Act to help fix stuff.
*Clearly, you can't manage yourselves correctly. We need to regulate you by:
-Regulate the derivative market. Previously these trades were made in SECRET. I think AIG/Lehman brothers or some big bank (I forget the name) failed because of it's unregulated derivative market. They became caught-up in these risky trades; in fact the Chief Operating Officer said that he didn't want to make the trades because of their risk and was fired. As a result, the Federal gov't spent Billions bailing out their unregulated derivative market.
-Remove the disorganization and mess: They consolidated the large collection of disorganized different firms/agencies within the government into one central regulating agency.
-Regulate the market and block risky trades/investments (Volcker rule + extra): Paul Volcker was someone who we needed (in the FED) at the times of the financial collapse. He previously brought interest rates up to 20% to combat extreme hyperinflation; although very unpopular, he realized the benefits of short term pain vs long term collapse. His rule was to stop risky speculative behavior like the ponzi-scheme loans to people who couldn't pay them off. The Dodd-Frank act also added an extra boost of protection and regulation to other areas as well.
-If you hear something, say something: Employees who report unlawful behavior or be impartial to the regulator are protected against the "company taking revenge". (Whistle Blower Act)
-Consumers are happy: The Consumer Financial Protection bureau offers average Americans protection and advice against the "Big Banks". Consumer Protection laws, "truth in lending", and overseeing financial services the average Consumers use.
-The Advise Meeting: A Council of Regulators meet and create plans when a financial melt down occurs.
-Pay it back or else no deal: This act was created to address the giant market collapse of 2008 when millions of people owning hundred thousand $ loans couldn't pay them back; the banks lost all their money in this investment and failed. This act requires the person loaning the money to prove that they can pay their loan back.
There are some opponents who claim that the derivative unit is too regulated or this or that, but overall the act addressed most of the concerns and did a decent job addressing them.
Are we a truly Capitalist society?
 |
Capitalism:
The idea of Capitalism is strictly survival of the fittest, as depicted in the cartoon. It supports a free-market, private ownership, minimal government regulation, and is generally very effective. As opposed to government ownership of business, capitalism is efficient because there are economic incentives for industry to be efficient and productive; consequently, this is very beneficial for consumers, due to decreases in cost and the product must meet their demands.
Ideally, 85% capitalism + 15% regulation is optimum.
* Government regulation is important because sometimes capitalism can fail. If pollution laws were not implemented, we would be Shanghai. However capitalism argues that if the consumers did not like pollution then they shouldn't buy the product, thus the pollution problem is solved. But if all the companies are creating pollution because it is "cost effective", then the consumer has minimal choice, and the problem isn't solved. This also applies to GMO foods (90% of corn is GMO), toxic (Bisphenal A) in products, and many other products. China is a poster-child example, most of their products are tainted with lead, formaldehyde, and many other products, and the consumer has little choice because most of their products all contain these compounds. This is why regulation is important in an environmental aspect.
*The Free Market Idea has a few faults which can be addressed through government regulation. When the large institutions, AIG, City Group, J.P Morgan Chase,.... failed. Our whole economy would have collapsed and turned into something similar to Greece, but the government stepped in and paid almost a 1 trillion dollar bailout in attempt to prevent a massive economic failure. (If I am not mistaken, the IRS payed the tax payers back the 700 billion dollars in bailout cash)This allowed the banks to still operate and loan money to businesses, homeowners, etc because if the bailout never was packaged, a complete shutdown would occur. The stock market would fail, this would fail..., and all the other businesses would be in trouble.
It is like a bridge, once the steel beams fail, the cables, reinforced concrete, etc fail as well. The bailout was like a bunch of new steel beams added to the bridge.
These banks were practicing very risky speculations in attempt for gaining short term profit despite long term bankruptcy.
Capitalism states that the bailout should have never occurred, if these banks fail, they will be out competed by other banks which would hopefully not be as risky so they don't become the failures. It also states that the bailout would encourage risky behavior because whenever they failed, they would just be saved, thus the bailout should never have occurred. However, in a economic collapse, competition, growth, development, consumers buying stuff drops to a standstill. This creates a terrain which cannot support new banks taking over. This capitalist idea of bailouts works when only 1 or 2 major institutions are a bunch of small ones fail, not when 10 or 20 major institutions fail.
The whole collapse could have been prevented with proper regulation. If we stopped the bank from making these extremely risky speculations, it would have never happened in the first place. If we increased interest rates, we cold have prevented risky speculation because the money which they were loaning would demand high interest thus giving them an incentive not to engage in such behavior. If we regulate outsourcing, we could bring jobs back to the U.S and grow our economy. This is why I support the 15% regulation + 85% capitalism idea.
* Conclusion:
We are a mixed society that has many Capitalism principles, probably 80% capitalism. However, we support regulation, but it is not very effective. We did not impose any punishments for the Banks' failure. Also, we should be more hostile to large corporations and break them up into smaller companies. If we broke up the big banks, we would not of had a massive failure.
14000 page views- (coming soon)
So close, .....we are almost at the top....13700 13701...13800....almost 14000...
Thursday, March 24, 2016
Misc.
You do know that you can use the search bar to "google" my post recommendations and if you think their is a post on my website relating to your interest; You also know that you can use the flip-card/magazine feature to look at a bunch of posts simultaneously, right?
Saturday, March 19, 2016
Friday, March 18, 2016
ENRON
Did you know that Enron's CEO once said, "Ask why.....ass hole" (ask why was there logan) to someone who wondered if they cooked their books . This post will explain the history of Enron and it's schemes and the importance of regulation. A 100% free market-no regulations can lead to big problems and Enron is an example in some cases.
Eco-electricity-house
I will be figuring out the amount of electricity our house uses per month and the maximum amount of energy that could be generated via means of photovoltaic, wind on the property. Unfortunately, stupid zoning laws prohibit wind turbine construction. I don't plan on photovoltaic on the roof because until we at least get our roof replaced which is a long time in the future (if they are installed and we need to replace the roof in 8 years). I am just wondering what it takes to power the average houseful and not be connected to the grid.
Testing
* The time stamp on my blog is wrong. I just changed it to Easter Standard Time and this is a test too see if it works.
Seed Banks and Biodiversity
 |
| Seed Bank in I think Norway or Finland or Greenland. I remember seeing this picture in a documentary. |
Today's agriculture and biodiversity are becoming threatened. Have you hears that fruits were more delicious 50 years ago, or that this food will not be as delectable or this.... These are biodiversity issues. These foods are grown in massive farms that do not have variety. As a result these crops are not as resistant to a disease or bug (they are also not as tasty because of the little diversity). This is a serious concern and disadvantage of mono culture style farming. However, many countries have combated this by constructing seed banks. They receive bio diverse seeds from all across the world and are stored at very cold temperatures to stop deterioration. It ensures that biodiversity exists for future generations. Without biodiversity, there would be a massive drought, insect catastrophe.... and most of these agricultural plants would die. See invasive plants post to learn more about biodiversity.
The robotics and unemployment issue and solution
 |
| Robotics Welders at Car Factory. |
See Automation Post to learn more about this topic.
Like expressed previously, robotics in the future will dominate most blue collar jobs, such as factory jobs, along with low white collar jobs like book- keeping. This should take place in the mid century, and grow profoundly as technology develops. The incentives are that the companies cost will decrease, maybe a few high board members will pocket some money for their "ingenious implementation", and product costs should decrease as well. However, this is short-lived because if massively implemented on let's say, 50% robotics in all blue collar jobs and 20% in white collar jobs, we have a very serious unemployment issue. Note that there are factories in existence, called "lighthouse manufacturing" that run entirely on automation.
Solution/Benefits if government takes correct action:
* Instead of work having a huge expenditure from your lifespan, workweeks should be shorter and pay should be around constant +/- 20%.
* This would mean that government should A) force companies to have a certain quota in employee to robot work ratio. B) have a shorter hour workweek (everyone has their same jobs but they just work shorter hours and get payed around the same).
* Ultimately, robotics in factories and other avenues should improve life if correct action is taken.
Are we really a Capitalist society?
|
Capitalism:
The idea of Capitalism is strictly survival of the fittest, as depicted in the cartoon. It supports a free-market, private ownership, minimal government regulation, and is generally very effective. As opposed to government ownership of business, capitalism is efficient because there are economic incentives for industry to be efficient and productive; consequently, this is very beneficial for consumers, due to decreases in cost and the product must meet their demands.
Ideally, 85% capitalism + 15% regulation is optimum.
* Government regulation is important because sometimes capitalism can fail. If pollution laws were not implemented, we would be Shanghai. However capitalism argues that if the consumers did not like pollution then they shouldn't buy the product, thus the pollution problem is solved. But if all the companies are creating pollution because it is "cost effective", then the consumer has minimal choice, and the problem isn't solved. This also applies to GMO foods (90% of corn is GMO), toxic (Bisphenal A) in products, and many other products. China is a poster-child example, most of their products are tainted with lead, formaldehyde, and many other products, and the consumer has little choice because most of their products all contain these compounds. This is why regulation is important in an environmental aspect.
*The Free Market Idea has a few faults which can be addressed through government regulation. When the large institutions, AIG, City Group, J.P Morgan Chase,.... failed. Our whole economy would have collapsed and turned into something similar to Greece, but the government stepped in and paid almost a 1 trillion dollar bailout in attempt to prevent a massive economic failure. This allowed the banks to still operate and loan money to businesses, homeowners, etc because if the bailout never was packaged, a complete shutdown would occur. The stock market would fail, this would fail..., and all the other businesses would be in trouble.
It is like a bridge, once the steel beams fail, the cables, reinforced concrete, etc fail as well. The bailout was like a bunch of new steel beams added to the bridge.
These banks were practicing very risky speculations in attempt for gaining short term profit despite long term bankruptcy.
Capitalism states that the bailout should have never occurred, if these banks fail, they will be out competed by other banks which would hopefully not be as risky so they don't become the failures. It also states that the bailout would encourage risky behavior because whenever they failed, they would just be saved, thus the bailout should never have occurred. However, in a economic collapse, competition, growth, development, consumers buying stuff drops to a standstill. This creates a terrain which cannot support new banks taking over. This capitalist idea of bailouts works when only 1 or 2 major institutions are a bunch of small ones fail, not when 10 or 20 major institutions fail.
The whole collapse could have been prevented with proper regulation. If we stopped the bank from making these extremely risky speculations, it would have never happened in the first place. If we regulate outsourcing, we could bring jobs back to the U.S and grow our economy. This is why I support the 15% regulation + 85% capitalism idea.
*Capitalism and monopolies:
Our Version of Capitalism:
*
HANG ON I AM STILL WRITING. I HAVE NOT YET EDITED THIS POST.
INCOMPLETE, I WILL FINISH IT IN 2 HOURS, I need some fresh air and go outside.
13,000 views
:)
13,000
13,000
13,000
13,000
13,000
13,000
13,000
13,000 13,000 13,000
13,000 13,000 13,000
13,000 13,000 13,000
13,000 13,000 13,000
13,000 13,000 13,000
13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000
13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000
13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000
13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,0000
PAGE VIEWS
Friday, March 11, 2016
Calculus
* The Calculus Presentation is making some real progress. I work on it somewhat frequently and this is a reason why sometimes new posts are not as frequent as standard: (Link is https)
LINK TO PRESENTATION
LINK TO PRESENTATION
Tuesday, March 8, 2016
HTTPS
Please realize that this blog has https availability. Use it to your advantage; by typing in the extra https you are receiving an encrypted version that is resistant to hacking, malware, malicious things...However, by not typing it in you will not receive these benefits. This blog has not been hacked but I am just letting you know that it has this ability. If you zoom in, you can see the fine print.
HTTPS Secure (zoomed in)
NOT HTTPS Secure (zoomed in)
HTTPS Secure (zoomed in)
NOT HTTPS Secure (zoomed in)
Friday, March 4, 2016
NEW POST SERIES
NOTE: ALL THESE PREVIOUS INCOMPLETE POSETS WILL BE FINISHED WITHIN
1 week < x > 2.5 weeks.
Is current development and industrialization progress?
Coming Soon
-There is a story of cavemen. One tribe had drove 500 buffalo's of a cliff. The other spent days hunting and only caught a few. The group that killed 500 at once had made them extinct by overhunting them; consequently they had serious food shortages. Are we making progress or are we going to hit a wall like the tribe that killed 500 at once?
-There is a story of cavemen. One tribe had drove 500 buffalo's of a cliff. The other spent days hunting and only caught a few. The group that killed 500 at once had made them extinct by overhunting them; consequently they had serious food shortages. Are we making progress or are we going to hit a wall like the tribe that killed 500 at once?
Photovoltaic in Space
The most attractive application of solar panels. We have already done it, our satellites rely on them, now how are we going to bring this electricity down to earth and how much power can it produce?
Electricity consumption and supply for future centuries
Can we sustainably supply enough electricity to fuel a modern civilization of 9, 10, 15, 30 billion?
What sources would fuel it.
Extra-terrestrial Life
* If it exists, why hasn't it rescued us or at least arrived. It does exist and since it does, will their impact be positive or negative?
Nuclear Waste
 |
| Yucca Mountain nuclear waste disposal |
There are claims such as we don't want "Chernobyl" or "Nuclear Waste". In this post, we will be discussing nuclear waste concerns. It turns out that nuclear waste is not a very large problem, if science not politics handles the problem. This is why science must handle it and unfortunately it has not received adequate funding, thus many amazing reactors have not been developed. Gov't shuts down a lot of these important projects even though they are not resource intensive. If I remember correctly, the Dept. of Education consumes $ 80 Billion/year and what have they accomplished? A IFR style reactor under research was shut down and consumed $90 million a year. The Yucca Mountain Project consumed $13 billion, total and it was shut down also.
* A significant amount of nuclear spent fuel is reused and only a small amount becomes waste.
*The half life of Nuclear waste depends on the reactor it is generated in. Most high-level waste generated by light-water reactors (standard 1960 style plants) has a half life of 10,000 years compared to 800 in an IFR style reactor. We need to design and construct reactors similar to IFRs, if we are serious about high-level waste.
*Not all nuclear waste is highly radioactive. A significant amount is low-level. Ironically, low-level waste can be found in the parking-lot of these plants. However some nuclear waste needs to be safely stored for thousands of years. However, if we had the tech, it would be cool if we could ship it to the moon. But, we could safely store it in depositories; this is very efficient at containing the radiation because it has to escape through hundreds of feet of rock. The Yucca mountain one was designed to store waste safely for 10,000 years.
*Nuclear Waste can be used in 4th generation Reactors as fuel. However, these reactors are under R&D and have not been constructed with the exception of breeder style reactors. We need to build more breeder reactors and subsidize R&D. Breeders have the potential to recover 95% of nuclear waste and turn it into electricity. To prove that these are economically viable, France has one that has an output of a 0.6 gigawatts; it has been operating for 36 years and still is. 80% of their electricity is nuclear and they are enjoying the economical and environmental benefits.
*70,000 tons of nuclear waste has been generated in the U.S since the beginning of these plants (1960s). A typical coal plant emits 3,500,000 tons of co2 per year. Nuclear Plants do not emit that much waste, about 1 ton/year.
*Nuclear waste can be sent to a reprocessing plant and recycled back into fuel. 28% of France's waste is reprocessed. Obama banned it in the U,S because he was worried terrorists might hijack the plant and steal fuel for nuclear bombs. If this is a valid concern, and it is, then spend the extra money to guard the plant, not ban it.
*Overall, Nuclear waste is a serious issue that needs to be taken very seriously. However, if we have the brightest people and we listen to them, there is little to be worried about.
Thursday, March 3, 2016
12,000 Page views
Assuming the average user spends 5 minutes on the blog and his laptop consumes 45wh. Thus
12,000 views * 1/12hr * 45w= 45 kwh of energy users have used looking at my blog.
At 10 cents a kilowatt hour that's $4.50 worth of electricity.
What can run off 45 kwh or 45,000 watt-hour:
* The amount of electricity your house uses in about a day.
* The amount of electricity the 3 Gorges Dam (World's largest dam; produces 20X more electricity than the hoover dam) produces in 0.016 seconds (2015).
Did you know our national debt can build 847, Three Gorge's dams? It only takes 54, Three Gorges dams to power the U.S.
Wednesday, March 2, 2016
Galapagos Turtles. Nope ummmm. Galapagos Tortoise
* Tortoises refer to land turtles. However, I call them turtles. It's not a significant issue, but just to let you know, the technical term would be tortise.
Most importantly, why are these turtles very important in the ecosystem, what is their role? Like many native species, a impact on megafauna affects the system; in a sense, it is like a DNA mutation. A letter may be removed and now the whole strand is off by one letter; each compound is incorrect and it creates chaos, this is why it is important for us to stop developing. In the case of these colossal turtles; when there population was decimated, many native plant species which relied on them for spreading had decreased; many insect species and other had a population decline and invasive plant species were not in check, they outcompeted the native ones and took over the forests. Even Though the some members of the original species are extinct, scientists are populating lands with turtles that are quite similar to these extinct ones in attempt to bring their role back into the ecosystem.
Cool info:
* Modern Galapagos turtles can weigh up to about 1000 pounds. If you put 2/3 of them in an elevator, you can override the weight limit in most passenger elevators.
*Galapago is the Spanish word for tortoise.
* These turtles are so large because they have a lower surface area/volume ratio. ". It is also because they can survive without food during massive migrations. Furthermore, they can survive temperature extremes because of their surface/area volume ration (a collection of 1000 blocks has more surface area for cold/warm temperatures to affect them. Compared to one giant block, there is a higher resistance to that negative consequence.)
*There hearing is not exceptional but they have decent eyesight and smell. Afterall, when they just eat plants all day, eyesight and smell is beneficial, not hearing.
* There is "mutualism between these turtles and other animals". These birds remove ectoparasites and get a free meal by eating these bugs. It is noted that sometimes these turtles will kill the bird to supplement their plant diet with protein.
*One each island, these turtles look different and share many different characteristics. These islands have different ecosystems and these tortoises have adapted to them. Thus, they have different features from island to island.
Tuesday, March 1, 2016
Trump
Trump is a unconventional president. He is different when compared to other candidates and if I could vote, most likely I would vote for him or Ben Carson. Interestingly, Ben Carson does not receive media coverage from media outlets and is always the person who receives the lowest attention in the debates. Thus, it is more difficult to see his policies and unfortunately the odds are not in his favor. Anyway, Trump is somewhat controversial; the media (mainly the liberal ones) exaggerate his statements sometimes, misrepresenting them to appeal to their audience; they also exclude some of the really beneficial stuff he says which you can find on fox. This tends to give the general population a more negative, bias, view of Trump. Nevertheless he is winning in the polls.
* Even though he does not believe in global warming, it is possible that he will implicitly solve it. He believes in clean air and water. However by solving these issues, he can indirectly solve global warming which he thinks is a hoax. Trump incorrectly believes Climate and Weather are synonyms and needs to talk to scientists or be dropped of in the Antarctic. However Donald said: “...We want to have clean air to breathe and beautiful clean water... I received many environmentalist awards (refers to green construction)… we ship our coal to china …. its unbelievable what they're spewing in the air...if you are talking about global warming or climate change you have to make the whole world behaves.” This statement is more eco friendly orientated than not. However, he also stated that Obama was dumb for claiming climate change is at the top of the list. He has said:"windmills are destroying every country they touch" while producing "unreliable and terrible energy". I think that he might create stricter clean air and water regulations, consequently this would also fight back against global warming. However, I think the true answer to most environmental issues is science and not politics. I would hope that he would support a "bakeoff" and subsidize scientific explorations and innovations. Despite his stances on climate change being a hoax, I have not seen significant progress by other presidents who believe in climate change.
* He wants to stop outsourcing. He said: “I’m going to tell them, ‘Now I’m going to get consensus from Congress and we’re going to tax you,'” Trump said. “‘So stay where you are [in Mexico] or build in the United States.’ Because we are killing ourselves with trade pacts that are no good for us and no good for our workers.” This will severely benefit our economy because we have high unemployment, layoffs, which in turn are responsible for our crappy economy.....(read U.S outsourcing/economy posts). As expressed in the Reforms post, you can't fix the environment without a strong economy and a low (preferably 0) nat debt. You can't exactly spend a few hundred billion dollars on massive biofuel infrastructure projects, nuclear research with a bad economy. I am very sure that he would play a very positive role if elected in transforming our economy.
*His business ideology should make gov't act more efficiently.
*He breaks up the conventional political correctness system. He speaks his mind.
Unlike other candidates who, when elected will have to be restricted because their Big Corporation Financiers want something back. For example, let's say Big Coal Institute gives Candidate X 10 million for his campaign, if he is elected and wants to promote renewables and other policies in a way that disadvantages Big Coal, they will try to stop him and he will act in their favor.
CONS:
Some argue that he is "unpresidential" and his attitude is not suited for important decisions. However, I do not think this is exactly valid.
Conclusion: He is a good president is many area's. I think that his environmental policy might not be the best, but he should do a decent job at transforming our economy. Thus, renewable energy/ innovative companies should take advantage of this situation. I would also think that he would set the stage for a massive environmental reform by fixing the economy. You could get another president after his term to thoroughly solve these problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)