Bob Caylor of the News Sentinel wrote a good piece on Ethanol. The Indiana Department of Agriculture commissioned an economic analysis of ethanol production and based on the scope of the analysis is actually a waste of money. Why pay for a research if what you get is worthless information? Why do I call the analysis worthless?
First of all, if you are going to do an analysis, it should be complete. Yes you can grow enough corn, but what happens to the corn used to feed to cattle, our dinner tables and corn oil? There is jus so much land available to grow corn.
Second, corn is harsh on the land.
Third Chris Hurt, professor of agricultural economics at Purdue University in West Lafayette readily admits he does not know how increase demand will affect commodity prices. Well I have relatives who farm and they like ethanol because it increases the prices they are paid for their corn. Good for farmers, bad for consumers.
Fourth, each gallon of ethanol gets a 51 cent per gallon tax credit. This is money you and I pay for in taxes. So if you are paying $2.75 for a gallon of E-85, the actual cost is more like $3.18 after paying the tax credit and since the E-85 is not as "energy concentrated" as regular gas, you are really paying more than $4.50 for that gallon of E-85.
But the real problem is not that you cannot calculate the true impact on commodity prices, but rather the wrong analysis was done. How much fuel/energy is consumed to produce one gallon of ethanol? Is it positive meaning you get more energy out than you put in? The answer is it take more energy to grow, harvest, transport, distill, build & operate the plant and all associated tasks than the gallon of ethanol contains.
But then we have politicians who are trying to buy votes, make themselves appear to be cutting our need for foreign oil while being part of the band wagon on renewable energy. Yes, ethanol is renewable as long as we have other energy sources to make it.
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Bob Caylor of the News Sentinel wrote a good piece on Ethanol. The Indiana Department of Agriculture commissioned an economic analysis of ethanol production and based on the scope of the analysis is actually a waste of money. Why pay for a research if what you get is worthless information? Why do I call the analysis worthless?
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
US Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) wants a National Speed Limit of 55 mph to reduce gas consumption
US Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) is not an engineer and I doubt she has any real knowledge of energy or how energy is converted. It is people like her in congress that debate energy bills, pass legislation on energy and we still are no closer to being energy independent than in 1973.
My car has one of those nifty instant and average gas consumption displays. I can tell you that my best gas mileage is at 67 mph. It is not 55 mph. My gas mileage improves dramatically from 22 mpg at under 45 mph to over 33 mpg at 67 mph.
Cars are designed to run on the highway. Engineers optimize the design of an engine, tire, transmission, coolant and more so that it runs efficiently. The real question is what should be the design criteria, city or high way driving?
Lower speed limits may just make driving to that destination in the time you have impossible or not worth it, thereby eliminating the trip all together. Was gas saved, yes, but not because of better gas mileage by driving slower? You could reduce gas consumption even more by lowering the speed limit to 10 mph.
If we want to be energy independent, then we need to look at where the oil is consumed. 45% is used for making gas. This means 55% is consumed elsewhere. Is this bunker oil for ships? Is this oil used in heating homes? Is it used in power plants? If it is oil used in heating homes, convert these homes to electricity and use windmills to produce the electricity. If the oil is used to power plants to produce electricity, replace these power plants with windmills. In both cases you decrease oil consumption far more than by driving slower.
Denmark produces 80% of their electricity using windmills. Windmills are now very cost competitive. Unlike nuclear, there is no waste disposal problem. They are reliable, clean, efficient and can produce electricity at 3.8 cents per Kwh. That is about as cheap as you can get.
Monday, May 29, 2006
I went to the Memorial Day parade today with my wife and two youngest. The crowd seemed to be a bit less and the number of entries (participants) fewer. Concordia Lutheran High School's Band marched and did a fine job. I wish some of the other local bands would participate. Bands can add a lot to a parade. My guess is it comes down to money. A band needs to pay for bus drivers, etc.
When I was stationed in Bremerton, WA I was "drafted" to march in the Memorial Day parade in Bremerton. I had been out of boot camp for nearly two years. The Navy always had a large contingent. We practiced marching for two weeks, which got us out of our daily work routine. Instead of chipping and painting inside a hot "tin can", I got to be outside. However, it was still not enough time to be proficient as the Marines.
Thursday, May 25, 2006
Tracy Warner writes about VA loss of Data
Tracy Warner on his blog wrote about his experience with identity theft as well as his fathers. One might have thought that when candidate placed "Identity Theft" as a major issue he might have perked up, but he did not. In my first attempt to unseat Souder in 2002, I presented Identity Theft as a very serious problem. However, the Journal Gazette was not interested in hearing about identity theft then nor were they interested about it in 2004 or 2006. Tracy writes that I am a one issue candidate when the fact is, I am anything but one issue.
I am proactive and do not wait for problems to raise their ugly heads. The VA loss is now a reactive problem that should never have occurred.
Each disabled veteran is issued a different number, but the VA does not use this. For some reason they like the Social Security Number. If you want to combat identity theft, you need to have multiple layers of security. Each government agency should be required to do their own background check on any identifier they issue. Relying on a social security number as the only proof that the person is who they say they are is just plain nuts. If a mistake was made in issuing that social security number, then which government agency will ever identify it as a mistake and correct it?
The Social Security Number is the least secure number there is. Master Card lost 55 million records, the VA lost 26.5 million records and colleges have lost tens of millions as well. No government agency should rely on the social security number and no U.S. Citizen should be required to use it as an identifier, for when they do the government only opens them up to identity theft.
The United Senior Actin of Northeast Indiana is sponsoring a town hall meeting to explain changes to Medicare on June 8, 2006 at the League for the Blind & Disabled, 5812 South Anthony Blvd. Registration begins at 9:30 am. Mark Souder and Tom Hayhurst are invited guests.
I do not know if they guests will show up. I believe Tom Hayhurst will make an effort to be there if at all possible.
I urge any young person to attend as well. On May 1, 2006 the Medicare trustee's stated the financial condition had worsened by two years. Simply put Medicare without changes will not be able to pay covered projected costs after 2018.
Since I am 50, I want to ask Souder why I should continue to pay Medicare taxes for a program that is projected to be unable to pay my benefits? I certainly do not want to pay more in taxes for the same lousy benefit.
The Rx drug program may have been well intended, but well intentions do not pay the bills. The initial estimate of $400 Billion over the first ten years has ballooned to over $850 Billion as of last month and could top $1 Trillion. It is immoral and un-American to borrow money, reap the benefits and pass the bill onto our children.
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
New Web Page Format
I would appreaciate if you would take a look at my web page and make comments on the changes i have made. Before I spend too much time on it, it would be greatly appreaciated to get some feed back on:
- Format, layout and information provided.
- Is it easy to navigate?
- Easy to find subjects?
- Is their information that is lacking?
26 million veterans have their data stolen
It is simply amazing that after all the identity theft in the news plus 9/11 that a government employee is so stupid as to take a disc home with 26 million social security numbers, names and birth dates of veterans and then loose it.
I have been extremely vigilant since getting a social security number to not give it to healthcare providers, insurance companies, utilities, etc. For over 35 years I have restricted who had access to my SS# and what it could be used for. In fact I did not let employers use it as my health insurance number nor a 401K account number or pin. Employers’ simple created a special number for me. Now after all this vigilance, it may have been for nothing.
I will say it again, the social security number is not a secure identifier and using it as identification to obtain a passport, driver’s license, open a bank account or what ever is about as stupid as it comes. But what do you expect from our representatives? Requiring a social security number adds nothing to the security of the United States. If anything it makes us more vulnerable. It is the weakest link.
Congress needs to pass legislation making it against the law to use the Social Security number for anything but social security. Back in 1935 the Social Security Administration promised that the social security number would not become a universal identifier. Another broken promise.
Friday, May 19, 2006
Veterans Need Our Assistance
As a Navy Veteran, I understand the risk of serving in the military. The Iraq War has produced over 2,400 fatalities and more than 22,000 casualties. Casualties may be slight, a bump or a bruise too severe such as loss of limb(s) and/or paralysis. Suffice it to say those who are injured in the line of duty serving our country deserve medical care for those injuries.
When I enlisted in 1977, I was told that I would receive full health coverage for any service-related injury I might be unlucky to receive. At the time I was young, could swim mile after mile, ride over 200 miles on a bike in one day and run for great distances. I was very healthy. But all of this changed in an instant in 1979. The engine-room I was in suffered a catastrophic explosion just inches below my feet. I was cut up, burned and broken.
In 1981 after a couple of years of a recurring service connected problem, I sought treatment from the VA Hospital in Fort Wayne. They hospitalized me, did tests and released me. I returned with other complications and was misdiagnosed. I went to my family physician who correctly diagnosed the problem and after a couple of months recovered. Since that time I never sought treatment from the VA again.
I had read recently the VA hospitals were some of the best run healthcare centers in the U.S. and that they were being used as role models for others. Wow, things had changed. Now after 25 years I returned to the Fort Wayne VA center for treatment for my service related injuries. To my surprise, my VA service connected ID card was no longer any good. I was in the computer system, but at the same time not eligible for any care. I had to re-enroll. The application required I provide my income, my wife’s income and my children’s income for 2005 as well as total cash, savings, checking, stock, 401K, IRA, bonds and the value of any other property. If I did not provide this, the VA would not enroll me. On top of this, it might be a month before I could be seen. I did not have a month I needed treatment now. I left and as usual paid for my treatment.
I am not seeking coverage for non-service related injuries, so why does the VA need to invade a veteran’s privacy who was injured in the line of duty? Our representatives need to investigate why our service-related veterans are receiving such shoddy treatment and their privacy invaded.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Northwest Allen County School Board
The Northwest Allen County School board voted on going forward with adding onto Carroll High School for a cost of over $63 million. This includes a new larger gym, a covered causeway between the freshman academy and main campus, new band room, an administrative space will increase by 85%, locker rooms for freshman academy, creating a large stairwell (consumes two classrooms), adding 27 classrooms and moving the cafeteria to the vocational area and constructing a new vocational wing.
A demographic study was done that showed the 2005-06 student body to total 1,652 but actual total is 1,717 or an increase of 4%. This study projects in the 2013-14 to have 2,374 and three years later in 2016-17 to have 2,698. In short the time frame covers ten years at, which time the new expansion will be at capacity. Will we then have one super high school that cannot be added onto due to land limitations? Is the plan then to build a new smaller high school? Is there a plan or contingency for what to do or is it up to those in the future to figure out?
It was difficult to pin point the exact current capacity of Carroll and the freshman campus. I am not sure why the school board could not just list current capacity and projected capacity, but needless to say, they did not. They informed the taxpayers that due to curriculum changes and computer labs capacity was already reduced by 200 students. They then presented the current student body to be 1,717, but again is this Carroll and the Freshman Campus or just Carroll with the freshman campus at 450 and does it include reduced capacity? I asked this question three different ways and got three different responses. The school board could not give a direct and single answer, which concerns me. Does the total student body total 2150 or is it 1717 and what is the current usable capacity?
The school board spoke in terms of two separate schools now and then after construction spoke in terms of a single school. They mixed and matched terms so much that I am still not sure of the total school enrollment.
When the architectural layout was presented I counted the number of new classrooms. This could be used to verify the increase in capacity using 26 students per classroom. Two current classrooms would be eliminated to make room for a super stairwell. The art rooms would expand into the current band practice room and the new construction would replace the current band room. In total I calculate about 27 new classrooms for a total increase in capacity of 702 students.
With a cost of $63.5 Million and an increase of 702 student seats, the cost per student seat is $90,570. A new $120 million school will have a new gym, hallways designed for student flow and a capacity of 1,700. The cost per seat is then $70,588 or 28% less. Afterwards a board member told me the reason why the board did not look at a new school was risk. They did not want to overbuild like East Allen County Schools. They faced the same question back in 1996. Turns out a new school then would have cost less per student seat than the addition that was ultimately approved. That decision has resulted in a higher tax rate to support the school system.
Many supported the addition/renovation plan based on having more gym space. This was deemed important based on testimony of parents who had children in dance, band, intermerals and cheer leading. Due to demand on space, these people supported the expansion. The problem is you can achieve the same result by building a new independent school.
The financial impact used the same smoke and mirrors or misrepresentation that all government entities use to sell a con and that is level financing. They showed the tax impact at 13.5 cents per $100 accessed value. They then created a bar chart showing current bond costs. The new construction would significantly increase the rate from 50 cents to 63.5 cents. But then showed the burden dropping over twenty years. This is because increased students equal increase property tax base spreading the burden over more. What they failed to show is that this drop over twenty years did not stop after ten years (when capacity would be reached) but continued for twenty years meaning that enrollment was increasing, but no increase in cost. At the same time level financing means the payments are fixed yearly even though the buying power drops. The correct accounting method to use is accrual accounting or real cost per student per year spread over the useful life of the construction. This method would show a slightly increasing cost yearly (due to replacement cost). The result is a mill rate that would not change based on the tax base. In simple terms look for this to be repeated in ten years or less.
For a $150K home, you are looking at $214 increase, a $250K is $405 and $350K home will pay $595 more. Recently the news reported that 83% of workers are not setting aside enough money for retirement. This tax increase in terms of retirement savings is close to 10% of that saved and it is already too little.
One school has pros and cons.
- Economy of size in classrooms – able to offer more academic variety
- Economy of size in athletics – one varsity team versus two
- Economy of size in utilities – adjacent walls reduce heat loss
- Economy of size in administrative – one administrative team, but larger. In addition salaries tend to be commensurate with school size so there are savings, they are much lower than a linear (1 to 1) comparison would produce.
- Busses travel ground already covered previously by other busses to pick up students.
- Increased traffic in one location
- Carroll hallways are the limiting factor. Even though you consume two classrooms for a super stairwell, you are still limited by the hallways for student flow.
- Making the basketball, football or any team will more difficult.
- A larger campus means more walking to get to infrastructures (cafeteria, administration, gym, etc)
- The original school dates to 1969. Newer construction dates to 1996 and this construction would date 2008. You are mixing three different construction periods and surrounding the oldest portions with the newest. What happens to useable life of buildings when you do this? At some point in time the 1969 portion will need to be replaced or becomes un-usable. Is it 100 years or 75 years from now? Whatever it is, the new portions will at the same time loose function or usefulness by 37 years.
- Renovation will remove infrastructure that has a useful life left, but is still being paid for by the first bond (1996). Renovation will update the HVAC, plumbing, electrical and construction, but keep in mind these were just added in 1996 and after just eleven years will be torn out. Those bonds were twenty-year bonds. We will now be paying on two bonds for the same identical equivalent space in many areas.
- Parking and traffic flow have not been resolved. Patchwork always leads to unforseen problems.
- A school Lock-Down was identified as a positive result, but in reality I think this newer larger school with parking in the rear and to the west make security the same problem if not a bit worse.
What was interesting is many teachers were there to support the change as a taxpayer. In government, anyone who has a vested interest in a business must excuse themselves from a vote on that topic. Teachers have a vested interest in the outcome, more so than just a taxpayer.
I believe the school board followed the letter of the law in the presentation, but I feel the board did an extremely poor job of presenting all the options available. They may have covered a new school cost, but frankly I have never seen a comparison report. We have new taxpayers moving in and they have the right to be informed as to what has transpired up to this point, especially when it has covered multiple years. When moving forward on a project, it is customary to review all options prior to a decision. A five-minute review of a new school cost should have been done, but was not. This may be why business does a much better job at controlling costs than school boards.
Thursday, May 11, 2006
Projected Rx Drug Bill Cost $827 Billion
The Rx drug bill for seniors was projected to cost $400 Billion when it was passed by our representatives. A year after it was passed, the costs were reviewed and then projected to cost $540 Billion. Many politicians knew they original number was low balled in order to gain passage. Now the paper reports our politicians saying it is now over $825 Billion.
A few days ago the paper listed the U.S. as having a third world infant mortality rate. Is it no wonder with how much of our healthcare resources we devote to those who are not infants? Every worker knows how much they contribute towards Medicare from each paycheck. Double this and you get the true cost to the worker. Then add in another 40% for cost shifting from Medicare to others because Medicare only reimburses about 70 to 75% of costs so health providers charges everyone else more.
The birth rate per woman has been dropping steadily for five decades. It now stands at 2.1 births per woman. This produces what is referred to as zero population growth where a woman has enough offspring to replace both partners when they die. With a low birth rate, the average age of the U.S. population has been increasing steadily. The average age is no longer being diluted by more births (a low age average in with high age). As we age or get older, we tend to use more healthcare. We therefore have a compound growth factor for healthcare costs in the U.S. We have increased costs because we are aging, cost shifting, new treatments and inflation. The result is nearly double digit increases.
U.S. healthcare is more like a lottery. If you live to age 65 you will be covered. The problem is everyone under age 65 is paying for those over age 65 and sacrificing their own healthcare because of it. Companies are cutting or eliminating healthcare coverage. The biggest kick in the pants is that Medicare is expected to be unable to pay benefits in full past 2018. All those under age 53 are paying into Medicare, but by the time they reach age 65, Medicare will not be able to cover their costs. What are our representatives doing about this? They expanded coverage!
Immigration is back - My Submitted Editorial
Do illegal immigrants do jobs Americans won’t and do they help our economy? Two good questions, but who knows, do you? Where does your information come from? Is it based on data or what you heard or read? According to Steven Camarota, Research Director for the Center of Immigration Studies:
The economic recovery has not helped less educated workers, why? Occupations with highest immigrant participation have 22 million Americans in the same occupations. There are 14 million less educated Americans in heavily immigrant occupations. If there were jobs Americans would not perform, then there would be few Americans in these occupations. The Department of Labor and Commerce track 473 specific occupations. There was no majority occupation that immigrants do that Americans do not. If there were, it would show up as 80% to 90% of an occupation being immigrant. There are 35 occupations where immigrants make up nearly 1/3 of the workers but these occupations represent just 7% of the total U.S. Workforce. These 35 occupations have 5 million Americans employed.
½ the American born drops outs and 1/3 of the Americans with only a high school education are in occupations that have 15% immigrants. American workers face significant competition in construction, cab drivers, nannies, maids and housekeepers where most are American. Those who hold the position immigrants perform jobs that Americans won’t tend to be better educated and more affluent Americans.
States with largest share of immigrant workers saw the largest decline (5% locally and 3% nationally) in less educated American employment. Less educated Americans left the workforce in greater percentages in states with highest immigration. Occupations with most immigrants have highest unemployment among Americans. Immigrants make less, but only due to less education, not job skill.
The 1980 amnesty of illegals saw wages increase by 5%. This means the penalty in terms of wages for being illegal is about 5%. The increase in supply of workers lowers: Benefits, Wages and Working conditions.
The perception is the U.S. is in need of less educated workers, which is not true. In 2005 there were 4 million American’s unemployed and 19 million who stopped looking for work. The U.S. does not have a 5% unemployment rate, but this rate is used to support immigration. Unemployment among less educated Americans is up 11% and 13% for dropouts. They already have the highest unemployment rate, lowest wage rate and employment participation among less educated has declined dramatically. They took the poorest workers and made them poorer. Less educated immigrants and less educated Americans do the same kinds of work. There is no such thing as a job a American will not do. Allowing legal status to illegals has enormous implications for America’s poorest workers. America is not short of less educated workers given the high unemployment rate and the high number of less educated workers who have stopped looking.
Sunday, May 07, 2006
Analyzing the numbers
Sylvia Smith of the Journal Gazette on Sunday wrote;
"Throughout the 3rd District last week, Souder received a noticeably smaller share of the GOP vote than he did in the 2004 primary."
"There’s a message under those statistics. Though the precise wording isn’t clear, we can make some educated guesses."
"One reasonable interpretation could be that Souder’s opponent ripened between 2004 and this year. If, for instance, Bill Larsen had used the intervening two years to improve his skills as a candidate, to increase his profile, to amass a following and to raise money, an argument could be made that Larsen drew people into the election.
But that was not the case. Larsen wasn’t a far better candidate this year than 2004. Yet he got about 3,600 more votes this year; Souder got 7,200 fewer."
So what did I do differently in 2006 than in 2004? I certainly became more vocal, wrote more, spoke to far more people, but is that enough to be responsible for the impact? Maybe people got fed up with deficits, energy, social security, Rx drug bill and more. Did I recieve more votes because of my stance on issues?
Deficits: When I speak to people my age (50), the single largest issue is budget deficits. They do not like them and fear for their children's future. Even Dr. Hayhurst views deficits as bad. A large contributor of deficits is earmarks. No one likes them! On Sunday morning John McCain said President Bush has promised to veto the latest bill that is to pay for Katrina and Iraq because of the earmarks. McCain hopes he does and so do I. The president should veto every bill that has earmarks in it. The president should have a web site created solely to identify those who push earmarks similar to the Sex Offender Web Sites. Call it the "Earmarking Offenders" and identify the amount, state, county and special interest associated with it. It is immoral and un-American to borrow money, reap the benefits and give the bill to our children.
Energy: Gasoline in California is over $3.00 a gallon, but the difference between here and there is primarily due to the special formulation requirements for California. The oil embargo was 1973. It is now 2006, 33 years later and we are no closer to being energy independent now than we were then. Politicians are being bought by special interests to build Ethanol plants. They view it as alternative energy and even renewable. In reality it is a waste of energy, costs more, costs the tax payer 51 cents a gallon to subsidize and drivers have now noticed that with E-85 they do not get nearly the same gas mileage. We need a truly 21st century energy source that is renewable, clean, reliable and cheap. Do you really think Mark Souder understands energy? If he did he certainly would not have been in Lagrange for the ceremonial dig for the new ethanol plant. But then Mark Souder thinks we should have reliable energy at any price. Energy is our countries Achilles heal. High energy costs lead to high inflation, loss of jobs, slow to flat economic growth and a decreasing standard of living.
When I speak to young people the single largest issue is Social Security. They view it as a rip off, con, they are being hustled, its a ponzi scheme and when you compare Mark Souder's proposal with my own, well there is only one choice they make, Bill Larsen.
Souder's position on Social Security:
The Elkhart Truth 2006-04-16
"Souder expects Social Security to become a "capped benefit" where future benefits are given only to those below certain income levels. He said the solution is for people to start private retirement accounts and savings plans.
"What can we do taxwise to help encourage more people to set aside more money?" he said. "The pension systems ... need to reward people and create an incentive to earn additional income" after they reach "retirement age.""
Mark Souder spoke to Prime Time 39 on 3-12-2004 and referred to Social Security as a "shell game." He stated, "For people under 30 its probably going to be income based. I am not saying we're going to pass that. It will probably be passed after I am dead." He continued "If you're 40, you might make it through the system. But if you're under 40, and certainly under 30, you had better start planning because if you want to have a decent retirement you’re going to need supplemental funds."
Mark supports Social Security Savings Accounts. Tax-free savings is an oxymoron. We have a $8.4 Trillion national debt and ran a $85.5 Billion deficit in March 2006. This is no different than you borrowing money to pay for retirement. Tax credits reduce federal income taxes; increasing the deficit.
Three issues, all concerning money. All affect the economy.
Friday, May 05, 2006
New Web Site
I took my son to IUPU yesterday to register and create a student account. While there I spoke to a young man who had not voted in the election. It turns out the office had one of my buttons and they had been talking about it. He did not like Social Security and thought it was a rip off, yet did not vote. In fact he said he never voted because his vote neither counted and that politicians did not represent young people. However, after only minutes this young person volunteered to create a web site for me and vote in 2008.
The primary election results show I did 85% better in Allen County than I did in 2002 and 1,000% better than I did in 2002. The trend is in the right direction and if it were a business, would be great news. The problem is even with these great growth rates time is running out.
Will our representatives fix social security in the next two years, no? If they cannot bring themselves to even speak openly about the problem, then there is no way a solution will be discussed. With this said, you the worker will pay another $7,300 or more towards Social Security Old Age benefits for current beneficiaries, yet less than $400 of this amount will be set aside for you. If you turn 67 after 2041, well even this $400 will do you no good because the trust fund will be exhausted by then. In other word if you are under age 32 you just got hustled, scammed or conned.
After speaking with several people over the past three days I have decided I will run again in 2008. Anyone who would like to help with my campaign in 2008, please call me at (260) 637-0741 or email me at firstname.lastname@example.org
All volunteers will be given a DVD with my mini series so that they will understand the importance of solving the Social Security problem sooner rather than later. I am also looking at methods of distributing the mini series. If anyone has any suggestions, please contact me.
Again, thanks for all your support. Without you, this past primary would not have been a success.
Thursday, May 04, 2006
29% up 40% from 2004
I want to thank all who supported me on Tuesday. Though I was hoping for a larger increase in support, a 40% increase over 2004 is not bad considering I am challenging an incumbent.
I began pulling my signs down at 6:00 PM Tuesday evening and so far from just Fort Wayne have recovered 293 signs. Looking at the signs I pulled, I do not believe I lost any do to wind or weather. Many of the signs I put out were used in 2002, 2004 and 2006 and still look good enough to use in 2008. If you should see any of my signs, either pull it down for me or give me a call at (260) 637-0741 or email me at email@example.com and I will have it picked up.
I will be making some changes in the coming months. First I will be changing my web site from the home built one I began in 1998 to a more professional looking site. I will attempt to organize information and material better. I will create a new section dealing with just energy. I have ten years experience in the nuclear field, studied ethanol, wind, solar, coal and my experience operating a 1200-psi steam plant. It is time to straighten out the media and politicians concerning ethanol and what are renewable energy sources.
I will also be promoting my mini series on Social Security called "Snookered." Feed back from those I gave it to who were, how should I say not supportive of my plan for Social Security, have been extremely positive. They told me they had learned more about Social Security in the first half-hour than they had previously known. They were very glad they had taken the time to watch it.