Rip Off???

Hi Everyone,

So there I was yesterday, in need of a tank of gas for my car. Like many of you, you probably have a favorite gas station. Maybe you get your vehicle serviced there and therefore buy your gasoline there. Most likely, the overwhelming reason is because of the lower price for gas. But how much lower is it?

Since I was already out doing errands and knew that I had to get gas, I started to notice the price of gas at every gas station I passed. Where I normally buy regular gas, the price was $3.59 per gallon.  There were other stations with prices ranging from $3.69 to $3.99. But the highest price I saw was at a Shell station that was selling regular gas for $4.09 Wow, that is a difference of $.50 per gallon or a $10 difference for 20 gallons. How can the price of a gallon of gasoline vary so much? I should add that where I buy my gas, is a mom and pop, no name brand gasoline. Can there be such a difference in gasoline's to command a 14% premium within a 5 mile radius?

Let's see if we can figure it out. First of all, there is a limited number of refineries in this country. So the no name gas is refined at the same location as the more expensive gas. Federal law requires gasoline sold in northern states to have added oxygen from November through March or maybe April. That means that both gasoline's must have it. The added oxygen makes the gasoline burner cleaner and more efficiently in colder temperatures. Additionally, all of the gasoline sold, at least in New York State, has 10% ethanol. So far, both gasoline's are exactly the same. Now if you believe their commercials, big name gas/oil companies, add even more additives to their gasoline that helps clean your engine, give you more power and burn cleaner. Not sure about their claims, but, it most likely doesn't cost $.50 per gallon. I believe that the difference is due to what they charge their franchises per gallon sold. That means that those big name gas stations pay more for their gasoline and therefore pass on the increased costs to their customers.

Now I know that some of you have cars, either new or old that requires premium gasoline with higher octane. In those cases, most likely the no name premium brand may not be a consideration. What I do know is that all our cars use regular gasoline and we have never, ever experienced any difficulties using the no name brand. If you haven't tried it, maybe you should. You will be able to save yourself a bunch of money, that you can then use on something else.

Happy New Year everyone.

Til next week.

Peter

Think You Have Heard It All? Think Again!

Hi Everyone,

Well, well, well! I am still here and I presume you all are still around. Therefore, all of the doom sayers were completely wrong about the end of the world. It didn't happen and all that has changed is the infamous Mayan long count calendar is now into its new calendar. I told you so....

Anyway, I learned something a couple of weeks ago that should flip your lids and get you all really angry. But first, we need to go back in history to AIG's bankruptcy a few years ago. We were all told that AIG, a huge insurance company conglomerate was too big to fail and it needed to be bailed out. And so it was bailed out to the tune of around $189 billion. What I am "mad as hell" about is that now we learn that HSBC, a huge banking/investment company conglomerate is too big to prosecute!? What?????? What am I missing here? HSBC was fined (settled) to the tune of $1.9 billion, the largest penalty ever imposed on a bank. Why the penalty? HSBC helped launder money for: Mexican drug lords, Iran, Libya and others. So let's make sure I got this right? HSBC agrees to pay $1.9 billion in fines, oh right settlement, because of years of illegal activity and now no one will be prosecuted? What is wrong with that picture? Just the amount of money transfers from Mexico HSBC between 2006 and 2009 was $670 billion!!!! And no one gets prosecuted? The total amount of illegal money transfers between 2006 and 2009 was an astonishing, wait for it............... $200 trillion!!!!! And no one gets prosecuted?

It seems that the story goes, that indicting HSBC could take down our financial system. So we should let people remain in their jobs, in one of the largest banks, where felonies were committed; to keep stability in our financial system? The Attorney General is so very wrong on this issue. My common sense screams at me that all those who were involved, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Oh, but the office that is suppose to uphold the law says they won't prosecute. I just can't say it strongly enough how so very wrong it is not to prosecute those people. Unfortunately, even the $1.9 billion is just a drop in the ocean to HSBC. They will feel no pain and employees will remain at their jobs and continue to do what they do without repercussions. Is there something that we are not aware of? Maybe, but at face value, HSBC admitted its guilt and then no one gets prosecuted. How sad and how wrong!!! By not prosecuting, doesn't it send the wrong message to other "big" banks? I think so.

Til next week...

Peter

Oh No, Not Again?!

Hi Everyone,

Again, recent events have forced me to change my topic. I have blogged about this before and I will blog about it again and again until a change is made. A change that must come and not soon enough.

Friday's massacre of 20 six and seven year olds and 6 adults in a school (not including the shooter and his mother) in Newtown, CT., means that tighter gun control must be made a reality and not lip service. Whether or not, the shooter was mentally handicapped is immaterial in this instance, due to the fact that it was his mother who legally owned the two handguns and the one semi-automatic assault rifle, which was the gun used in this unimaginable tragedy. Can someone explain to me why it is so damn important to be able to own an assault rifle? Are they used for hunting? No! Assault rifles were designed for one use and one use only. That use is to kill as many people, in as short of period of time as possible. So why do people think that they need to own one or more?

Are you aware that Michigan just last week, passed a bill that will make it legal to carry a concealed gun? Yes this is true. The Governor said that he had not made up his mind as to whether or not he will sign the bill into law. But here is another huge problem with the bill. It would allow people to carry their concealed gun into a school. Has Michigan lost its mind? Maybe that state has not experienced a mass school shooting. But approval of this bill will mean that instead of, if a mass shooting occurs to when a mass shooting occurs in a school. Schools and guns don't mix.

Add to the mix of gun control is the NRA, who has a hugely successful lobbying arm that seems to be able to get whatever they want. The NRA fights tougher gun control at every chance it has to and so far they are winning. This has got to stop. A minority of people, (gun owners), can not and should not make guns law controls for the entire country.

Are you aware that 40% of all gun sales in this country don't even have a background check done? Amongst other things, people legally sell their guns outside of each and every gun show. Those sellers don't care who their buyer is, they only care that their buyer has cold hard cash. How many more innocent kids and adults must die before we have tighter gun controls? This should not be a political issue, but it has and probably always will be a political issue. Politicians should get over their political differences and actually enact a law that will save and protect our kids as well as adults.

Any new gun control laws should be implemented in steps. The first step in my book of common sense rules, tells me to outlaw the ownership of any assault weapons. The only people in this country who should have and use assault weapons are the police and military. There is no necessity for any one else to own them, period. Step two is for all owners of such guns to mandatory turn them in, maybe for cash. Step three is to have a minimum jail time of say, 10 years, if convicted of having one. More jail time if it is used in a crime. Step four is that all gun owners must have their guns safely stored in one of those gun safes with a combination lock and no key lock! We must do something to  prevent these type of tragedies from happening again. 

Schools should be a safe haven for kids without the fear of being killed. Not only did the shooter take away 27 lives prematurely, he stole the innocence of countless other children who survived. Whether or not they heard or saw something, their class/school mates, teachers and Principal were killed and are never coming back. To make matters worse, the shooter's actions will cause an undetermined amount of kids to have some kind of mental issues down the road. Some may even have problems that will be with them for the rest of their lives. Do we as a country, want that scenario to keep repeating over the issue of assault weapons? I hope not. It's time for a change regarding gun control and it's not happening soon enough, especially for all of the survivors, including parents of what just happened in Newtown.

I believe that the Newtown tragedy will become the straw that broke the camel's back and more and more people are going to open their windows and scream at the top of their lungs, that they are mad as hell and aren't going to take it anymore!!! Time will tell.

Til next week.

Peter

Why Is Chicken Little Screaming Again?

Hi Everyone,

Recently I have been doing some online research on a topic that will affect every living thing on our planet, or will it? The subject of today's blog is 12/21/12. Hopefully you have not been living under a rock and recognize that date as the last day of Earth, before the supposed end of the world as we know it.

Thousands of years ago, the Mayan's created a calendar, and not just any calendar. The Mayan's were an advanced civilization who were able to figure out that observations of the sun, moon and stars translated into a method to figuring out how long a day was, how many days there were in a month and how long it took for the Earth to travel around the Sun. Using their new found information, they were able to create a calendar that was not just a yearly calendar, but a two thousand year calendar. Their two thousand year calendar ended on 12/21/12. So does that mean the end of the world, since the calendar ends?  Last year, while doing Christmas shopping, I found 2012 calendars for sale that ended on 12/21/12. Well my research has found some very interesting sites that give numerous reasons for the end of the world. There are other reasons than what I will give you, but these are the top six reasons and are in no particular order.

1) There will be an alignment of the universe that will destroy the Earth.

2) A meteor or an asteroid will strike the Earth.

3) A mysterious planet called Nibiru is on a collision course with Earth.

4) A giant solar storm from our sun will hit the Earth.

5) A polar shift will occur on Earth.

6) There will be a reversal of the Earth's rotation.

Well, well, well!? There seems to be a lot of destruction heading our way. What are we as a planet going to do to avoid the end of the world cliff that so many people truly believe is coming? My reaction was to investigate this further. So I checked out NASA's web site. NASA says that since 12/21/12 is less then 2 weeks away, they would definitely be able to see a meteor, asteroid or a planet heading our way. NASA states that nothing is heading our way, not even a so-called close call one. NASA also says that there is no universe alignment, solar storm, polar shift or a reversal of the Earth's rotation is going to happen. They stated that the Earth is over 4 billion years old and they fully expect the Earth to still be here on 12/22/12. NASA concluded that there is absolutely no science to believe that the end of the world is coming. There is just no evidence!

So, if NASA says the Earth is not going to end any time soon, how did this theory come about? When the Mayan's put chisel to stone to create their calendar, or long count calendar as we call it, they went out two thousand years from when they were living. The long count calendar just happened to end on 12/21/12. It is just like the calendar hung in your kitchen. Every year, your calendar ends on 12/31. Did the world end on the following January first? Obviously not. So it is true with the Mayan's calendar. 12/21/12 just happened to be the end of their long count calendar and 12/22/12 would just be the first day of their next long count calendar. Makes perfect sense to me, doesn't it?

Since the beginning of humans, people have believed in different and numerous Gods. But almost all of their beliefs were based on what was happening with the sun, moon and stars, as well as floods, drought and storms occurring here on Earth. People are entitled to their own beliefs, but not their own facts. And the facts here absolutely don't support the Earth ending on 12/22/12, or any time soon after that, for that matter. So with that in mind, I will be blogging as usual on 12/23/12.

Til next week.

Peter

The Virtues of Wood

Hi Everyone,

Before I get into today's blog, I have to again give my opinion regarding the upcoming fiscal cliff that this country is fast approaching. It appears that the GOP is again holding this country hostage over the one issue of increasing taxes to the wealthy 2%. Will history repeat itself? Romney and his plans/policy lost the election and President Obama and his plans/policy won. Did you know that 65% of recently polled people approved increasing the tax rate of the wealthy. What's not to get? Now is the time to compromise on both sides and that includes tax rate increases for the wealthy and cuts to government programs. It will be the GOP's fault if the fiscal cliff becomes a reality and this country goes into another recession. A small minority of GOPers, tea party members, are themselves holding their own GOP hostage. Something has to give soon, or else!!! Time for the GOP to do the people's will and stop being selfish worrying about their re-election and the wrath of Grover Norquist.

And now for today's blog... Those of us old enough will remember when it was affordable to heat one's home. Those days seem to be a far distant memory, especially when heating bills just keep going up and up. Isn't there a solution to heating your home without breaking your bank account? If you think about it, the three main stream ways to heat your home are: oil, propane or natural gas. There are accessories that you can add to your heating system to make it more efficient, i.e.: hot water solar panels, geothermic wells and upgraded burner units etc. All three are pricey and the payback will take years.

My common sense solution is an obvious one.......... a wood stove. Now I fully understand that wood stove use is not a viable option for all applications. But for those who are able to use a wood stove, the benefits are immense. When a gallon of oil went to $4.25, that's when my wife and I decided to buy one. That was four years ago and we have never looked back for many reasons. The first reason is that at $4.25/gal, times the number of gallons of oil we didn't have to buy, for that first winter, the wood stove actually paid for itself within one year. Unheard of. We also use the wood from our property and have only had to buy two cords of wood during the second and third year of use. The second reason is that the cost of a full cord of wood, 4'/4'/8', is about 80% less then what it costs to fill our 275 gallon oil tank and they both last the exact same amount of time, 2 months. One cord of wood costs $200.00 or $100 per month and filling up a 275 gallon oil tank costs approximately $1,000 or $500 per month. The third reason is that instead of lowering the thermostat to save money and then having to wear sweaters to stay warm, using our wood stove, the temperature is a balmy 75-80 degrees. If it gets to hot, you open a window or as many as you like. The fourth reason is that we no longer have winter time static electricity. There is a kettle on top on the wood stove and that gives the house a very comfortable 45-50% humidity level, instead of around the 30% humidity level when we used our boiler. The fifth reason is that wood is a renewable fuel source, enough said. And finally the last reason is that new wood stoves now come with a catalytic converter which makes them burn wood cleaner and more efficiently.

FYI, there are even wood stoves that can be connected to your hot water baseboard heating system. There are also whole house wood burning furnace systems that are located outside your home, in its own little building. Some counties have laws restricting the use of those outside wood burning furnaces though. Besides the regular looking wood stoves, there are wood stoves that are highly artistic and futuristic looking and others that are unique in style and colors. There are wood stove inserts that fit directly into your existing fireplace. They aren't as efficient since the majority of the stove sits directly under the fireplace's flue opening.

Using a pellet stove is more expensive then a wood stove due to the fact the the cost of pellets is about $300-$400 per month vs. $100 per month for the wood.

If you would like to pay considerably less to heat your home and if you like to have a warmer than normal home and if you have the ability to have a wood stove, why not consider one? It just makes sense and can save you cents.

Til next week,

Peter

Sandy's Aftermath

Hi Everyone,

So Sandy has come and gone, but her aftermath will be here for years to come. Even though the majority of people have gotten their electricity back, there are still tens of thousands who have not. Why? To find the answer all one has to do is look at any ocean shore community in New Jersey, New York and Connecticut. Those shore communities still look like WWIII had hit them. The media has tons of print and screen stories about the damage done and the beginning of the rebuilding effort in these affected areas.

Here on the East Coast, recent history, just using the past 1 1/2 years, has shown that hundred year storms, or storms of the century, lately occur more on a yearly basis. We have not gotten an increase in the number of storms that hit us, but more of the storms have become monsters, with the monster damage that accompanies them. Is global warming to blame? And if not, what is causing these monster storms? Will there be another monster storm next year, like on 10/29/13? So I have a question that needs to be at least contemplated before this current rebuilding process is completed. Does it still make common sense to keep rebuilding in known flood zone areas like ocean beaches and barrier islands etc.? Even though the Federal Government mandates flood insurance in areas prone to flooding, how many times can you rebuild in the same area, over and over again, before it no longer makes any business sense, or common sense to repeatedly rebuild. I think the time is coming now for a major discussion about when a building, be it a home or a business, does not get rebuilt. Maybe after being demolished for the third time? Does it make any common sense to keep rebuilding when the question is not if, but when the next storm will hit? The answer/solution will be hard to get since you are talking about not rebuilding peoples homes and/or businesses after a certain number of storm related demos. But, even if you don't agree with me on this, you watch what is going to happen.

This is what I think is going to happen sooner rather then later. First of all, some one will figure out that just the tri-state region, (NJ, NY and CT), damage total will reach over $100 billion. Yes $100 billion, in just three states, which doesn't include all the damage done to: D.C., Maryland, Delaware, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Maine. Add that to the damage from the tri-state area and the real damage total will be an astronomical amount, never before seen. That will make Sandy the costliest storm, by far, in U.S. history. Then the discussion will begin and sometime down the road, the cut off amount and/or number and how close one can build to an ocean and/or even a river, will be decided and then implemented. After the "third strike", an affected owner should be bought out based on the fair market value as of the date of the storm. There really is no other way, is there? It is an unfortunate statement of fact that humans are no match against mother nature. She will win every time. So why would it make sense to keep rebuilding in flood zones that can also be hit hard by hurricanes? That's a double whammy that is a lose-lose situation.

Til next week.

Peter

Chicken Little Was Wrong

Hi Everyone,

This past election day, the citizens of Colorado did something that no other state has ever, ever done. Who would have thought that a mid-western state would be the first? All I can say is, what took so long? I even blogged about this back on 10/16/11. In a million years, I never would have guessed back then that it would happen so quickly. Are the voters in Colorado just plain crazy? I think not.

What am I talking about? The legalization of marijuana. On November 6, 2012, Colorado voters approved a change to their state's constitution that legalized pot for personal use. Yes it is true. The personal use of pot is no longer illegal there. FYI, Colorado approved medical marijuana with a doctor's prescription, three years ago. And guess what happened with medical marijuana? Nothing bad happened and the sky didn't fall, as some prominent politicians had predicted. Instead of something bad happening, something good actually happened. A new, high revenue source was discovered. Somehow the lawmakers in Colorado managed to agree to put the legalization question to the voters; and vote they did. More people voted to legalize pot then voted for either President Obama or Mitt Romney. It is apparent that the citizens saw a great opportunity to increase their tax base from just medicinal use to now include personal use. It will be very interesting to see just how much more tax revenue they take in.

I know that there are a lot of people who are totally against legalizing pot. But maybe now is the time to seriously think way outside of the box in order to find new tax revenue sources that people will approve. Alcohol prohibition didn't work in the 1920's and early 1930's and marijuana prohibition is not working today. In addition to the new tax revenues that Colorado will now receive, think about all of the cost savings from all of the law enforcement agencies used to enforce the old laws. There will be less prisoners also. It is a win-win situation for everyone, isn't it? Maybe states with huge deficits should consider this option.

Unfortunately I did think of a potential speed bump for Colorado. The federal government still says that marijuana is still illegal. I sense a U.S. Supreme Court date looming. As always, time will tell what will happen.

Til next week.

Peter

Hope

Hi Everyone,

I'm back.......... finally. One year to the day, 10/29, but this time due to hurricane Sandy, we lost our electricity again. But this time, the outage lasted for 8 1/2 days, the longest ever for us. You may have watched or heard of the TV show, Breaking Amish? Well my family and I were really becoming Amish. Not so much fun with no phone, no lights, not a single luxury, oh wait that was from another TV show. Remember it? Anyway I digress.

Today's blog isn't about the completely and utterly total lack of common sense of almost every electric utility company in the tri-state region regarding their response, or should I say lack of a response to Sandy. Today's blog is about hope. Hope that common sense is used by the people who seem to never be able to use it, no less heard of it. The people I speak of are of course politicians. Even though President Obama won the popular vote by a small percentage, he won a decisive win with the Electoral College, 332 to 206 with Florida's votes finally counted, 4 days after the election was over. What is Florida's problem with elections? Can anyone explain that to me?

The bottom line is that the American people have spoken by casting their ballots. Now where does that leave partisan politics in D.C.? Hopefully DOA in the morgue and not to rear its ugly zombie head for at least the next four years. Now is the time for common sense to rule in D.C. and compromise to become a good thing and not a dirty word. Both sides need to and absolutely must begin to start compromising ASAP, for the sake of our country. But, the GOP must immediately take off the table, no tax increases for the rich. That's because that's part of what the majority of people voted for. If the GOP continues with their no tax increase stance, they will again be seen as obstructionists and will loose even more seats in the mid-term elections in two years. It is now time for Grover Norquist to crawl back into the hole from whence he came from, (see my blog dated 11/27/11). But I stress that both sides must compromise and do what is right for the people of this country. Although I wish that politicians would just do what is right for us and stop worrying about doing what they think they should do in order to get re-elected. That really is wishful thinking, but one can hope right? Maybe it is really time for term limits. No more life time jobs with life time benefits.

In the spirit of today's blog, I hope that civility also returns to D.C., ASAP! Additionally, the lies, rhetoric, distortions, name calling and the vocal sore losers who say they will move to another country must stop now! We can only hope!

Til next week,

Peter

Walking

Hi Everyone,

Yesterday, here in the Hudson Valley, was one of those top ten most beautiful days. My wife and I along with another couple, took for the most part, a leisurely stroll on the "Walkway over the Hudson" in Poughkeepsie, NY.  The views, foliage and the river were a sight to behold. The walkway is a refurbished 1.5 mile railroad bridge that was transformed into a pedestrian walkway. Walking is great exercise and an easy and safe to do. Or is it?

In this country, walking is now becoming a dangerous thing to do, with increasingly more accidents occurring each year. How is this possible? It is possible when one lacks common sense. The reason for more pedestrian accidents while walking is due to texting while walking. Yes texting while walking. The majority of these accidents happen in large cities and the incident rates are rising rapidly.

Twenty five years ago in New York City, you could always tell who was a New Yorker and who was a tourist. The New Yorkers were always looking down, so as not to step in any dog pooh and to avoid sidewalk cracks and to watch for the all important curbs and other obstructions. The tourists were always looking up at the architecture of the buildings. Today, the tourists are still looking up, which I don't think will ever change and the New Yorkers are still looking down. But now, the New Yorkers, as well as residents in other big cities, are still looking down, but not for dog pooh etc. They are looking down at their phones so they can text. Texting while walking is becoming a very dangerous activity. While people are texting, they are not watching where they walk and consequently become the victim of their own lack of common sense. I read, see and hear more and more articles about people who are texting and get hit by a car because they didn't see the crosswalk sign that said, don't walk. Or they walk off a curb and hurt their ankle, leg or back. They also walk into sign posts, light poles etc., etc.

All of the accidents could have been avoided if only they had used some common sense. My common sense tells me that obviously if you need to communicate with someone while walking, the old fashion way of using a cell phone to actually talk, (with your voice) is a far better and safer way to do it. Think about it, you don't have to look at the phone while talking, what a novel idea.

I do have to admit, that while on our walk yesterday, I did see a handful of people walking while texting. Even though the surface of the walk was smooth with no cracks and obstructions etc., those people were missing some fabulous views and gorgeous fall colors seemingly painted on the hills and mountains that were so clearly visible. Their loss.

Til next week.

Peter

Apathy Part Deux

Hi Everyone,

This past Friday, I worked for our local school board for their referendum vote to increase our school taxes to replace the high school's football field, the surrounding track and a new boiler amongst other items. For your information, since the majority of you don't live in my school district, our football field and track were replaced seven years ago and has a 15 year note. The field had a ten year life expectancy. Since there was a Friday night football game on the same night of the referendum vote, I had an opportunity to check out the field and track, up close and personal. I am no expert on football fields and/or tracks, but to me, both of them looked just fine with no obvious deficiencies. I then wondered if a new field and track were to be installed, since the original field's note had eight years remaining, how much more and how much longer would we have to pay?

That was the gist of the referendum, but that is not really what today's blog is about. In my 3/18/12 blog, I wrote about the lack of voter turnout at elections. Well last Friday's vote was no different. Out of approximately 18,000 eligible voters, a total of about 1,107 voted. Doing the math, 1,107 votes represents, 6.15%. This vote was about whether a new field etc were needed and whether our already high school taxes would increase. It absolutely amazed me that only 6.15% of eligible voters voted. What is wrong with that picture? Everything!!! I do not understand why more people don't vote. Oh right, the name of today's blog sums it up best...... apathy. The definition of apathy is, "lack of feeling, absence of emotion, indifference". That is what is happening and what is wrong with school votes and elections in general. Why don't more people vote? Could it be the day of the week, Tuesdays when voters are asked to vote? Well, our school board decided to hold the vote on a Friday. They may have had ulterior motives for having the vote on a Friday, with a Friday night football game to boot, but the end results were no different.

With next month's Presidential election happening, the largest percentage of voters will vote, as usual. Why is that? Do people really believe a presidential election is more important then their local elections and school budget vote/referendums? Of all the democratic countries around the world, the United States consistently has the lowest percentage of voter turnout. Apathy must end and voter interest must increase.

FYI, the final vote for last Friday's referendum was 368 yes and 739 no, so the referendum was defeated. But the real outcome is that 6.15% of the eligible voters or 1,107 people determined the outcome for 18,000 people. To me, that just doesn't seem fair or right. But that is the way our system works. So my common sense solution is for everyone to vote each and every time. It is our duty and more importantly, it is our right to vote! Never pass up the opportunity to vote. Take your stance and vote!!! Don't let a small minority determine the outcomes for all!

Editor's note: On 9/23/12, I gave out my Common Sense Award, CSA #5. My mistake, it should have been CSA #6. My apology to all.

Til next week.

Peter

Has Anyone Really Thought This Through?

Hi Everyone,

As I have said so many times before, the majority of politicians just don't have any common sense. I have to give credit for today's blog to a woman who wrote a letter to the editor of my Gannett newspaper. Her name seems very familiar since she lives in my old childhood town and I believe she was my ninth grade homeroom and social studies teacher.

The Republican platform, which was approved during the GOP's recent national convention, includes among other things, that abortions would become illegal. Their reasoning for that stance is that they also included in their platform that life begins at conception. Consequently, having an abortion would equate to killing a person. Foregoing the argument about the separation of church and state; if that is their position, have they really thought it through? Did they use any common sense in coming to that conclusion? I think not. Why? Well let's use some common sense and see for ourselves.

If at the time of conception, an embryo is then considered a person, will the following happen to a pregnant woman?

1) Will she have to pay for: two tickets to attend a movie, two tickets to attend a museum, two train tickets for a one way ride or two plane tickets for a one way trip?

2) Will the census count every pregnant woman as two people?

3) Will a pregnant woman be able to claim an extra dependent on her tax returns before she has even given birth?

4) Will a pregnant woman be legally allowed to drive in HOV lanes?

5) Will a pregnant woman have to pay two tuition fees to attend college?

6) Will a pregnant woman have to pay double medical insurance premiums?

How far would this go? Where would this end?

As the writer said in her letter, "This idea of person hood beginning at conception can have wild and detrimental ramifications for the entire society". I am sure that there are other ramifications that have been missed, but the GOP's positions were not well thought out and obviously again lacked any common sense. Women should be able to control their own bodies and not have the government make the decision for them for such a personal decision. Roe v Wade should stay the law of the land and person hood begins at delivery and not at conception.

Til next week.

Peter

Common Sense Award #5

Hi Everyone,

Again I have shelved, temporarily, my planned topic for this week in order to inform you of what I believe is an even better topic.

Yesterday, my family and I spent time with family members in New Jersey. When we were outside, I noticed something that I have never seen before. As we were standing outside, I happened to look at a telephone pole across the street and saw a solar electric panel near the top of the pole. I then asked who put it there? I was told that their electric company, Public Service Electric and Gas had installed them. I was then shown another one down the street and still another one further down another street. It seems that during the past 12 months or so, PSE&G had installed some 5,000 solar electric panels, (photovoltaic systems) on certain poles. They obviously only used the ones that get the best southern exposure.

During sunny days, the solar panels produce clean green electricity that goes directly into their grid. When you think about it, electricity usage is always the highest during the summer months. So during the long summer days, the extra electricity created by these solar panels must help out a lot. For this reason, I am awarding PSE&G my Common Sense Award. This is only the fifth time I have given out an award. The last award I gave out was back on 3/20/11. PSE&G should definitely be commended for their thinking outside of the box and using great common sense by installing the panels on individual telephone poles. PSE&G also didn't have to buy an unknown amount of land to install the same number of panels. They already owned the poles, so it just makes great common sense to install them on their own poles.

I have never seen solar electric panels on any telephone poles in New York state. Maybe the NYS power companies should take a short drive to NJ and see for themselves. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to come up with new and exciting ways to increase electricity output. It just takes initiative, money and of course common sense. I don't know if PSE&G is planning to install more panels, but I sure hope they do. Congrats to PSE&G!!!

Til next week.

Peter

We Saw It With Our Own Eyes

Hi Everyone,

This is not the blog that I had originally planned to write today. But what happened yesterday changed my mind. My wife and I had to go to our local grocery store yesterday and since it was a Saturday, the parking lot was full as usual. I found a woman loading her car with groceries, so I decided to wait for her space. The woman glanced at our car a few times while she was loading her car, albeit at a slow pace; but patience has its virtues and I wanted her space. Editor's note: the woman appeared to be middle age, probably in her fifties. But what happened next surprised us both.

When she had finished unloading her cart, she pushed the empty cart behind the rear bumper of a large SUV. My wife and I looked at each other in a kind of disbelief. She then proceeded to get in her car and backed out of the space. She then motioned for me to pull into her vacant space. I gladly obliged her. As we pulled into the space, we realized that there was a woman in the driver seat of the SUV that now had a cart right behind it. The SUV was so tall that there was no way the driver could have seen the cart. As soon as I parked, my wife jumped out of the car to tell the driver about the cart. The driver was extremely happy that she had been told about the cart and thanked my wife and then me for telling her.

Now for the ah ha moment...... As my wife and I walked by the SUV to the rear bumper, where we were going to take and use the cart, the woman who put the cart behind the SUV, had waited in her car and rolled up to us to tell us that she hadn't put the cart behind the SUV. She told us that it was someone else, and that she decided not to move the cart since we may have needed it. What?????!!!!! What did she just tell us? That she didn't put the cart behind the SUV? Was this woman stupid or did she lack any common sense what so ever? She knew that we were watching her while she unloaded the cart. Why would she: 1) put a cart behind a vehicle and 2) then lie about it? She could have just driven off. But noooooo, she waited for us to lie and try to place the blame on someone else. What was she thinking? Common sense should be on her wish list for her next upcoming birthday!

My wife and I were flabberasted about the whole little incident. Having worked in Human Resources for a long time, I am never really surprised about what people can say or do. But this woman takes the cake.

Til next week,

Peter

When Is It Not Real?

Hi Everyone,

We have just experienced one of the hottest summers since records have been kept. I can remember when we used to get about, maybe 10 days of 90 degrees or hotter. Now, I lost count after June ended. But, when it gets really hot, one of the best and most refreshing, non-alcoholic summer drink is lemonade. I personally like it on the tart side. Of course there are tons of other drinks, including soda, but today's blog is about lemonade and in particular, Tropicana lemonade.

So what are the ingredients for making perfect lemonade? Growing up, the only ingredients used were lemons, water and sugar. The grand total is three! Makes perfect sense to me. What else could possibly be needed? These days since we don't make our own lemonade, we buy it instead. Do you read the labels on every food and drink product that you buy? We read some, but not all. Now I think that is a mistake. After recently buying Tropicana lemonade, I just happened to read the ingredients label. Instead of three ingredients, there are at least six. I say at least six, because when I tell you the ingredients you will understand. Tropicana's ingredients are: filtered water, high fructose corn syrup, sucrose, lemon juice concentrate, ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and natural flavors. Natural flavors? Since flavors is plural, how many flavor ingredients have been added? Hence my reason for saying it has at least six ingredients. But come on now, in reality, if you already use lemon juice concentrate, what other natural flavors are necessary? Isn't lemon juice concentrate already full of vitamin C? My point here is that the original three ingredients have blossomed into at least six now. Why?

Common sense tells me that if Tropicana used less ingredients, the following would happen: 1) their costs would decrease and 2) the product would be better for their consumers. Call me crazy, but isn't that called a win-win situation? So what is the down side and why don't they make their lemonade with only three ingredients? Oh yea, it's called shelf life! By adding those "extra" ingredients, Tropicana has increased the shelf life to an amazing seven+ weeks. Which means it is more like two months+. Most likely though, by using real products, the shelf life would decrease. I would bet dollars to donuts (what does that actually mean?) that people would rather have the real ingredients with no other additives. Doesn't that just make common sense? Someone should inform Tropicana ASAP! So the question is, if Tropicana can make OJ with only oranges, how come they can't do the same for lemonade?

Til next week.

Peter

Oh No, Not Again?! Will They Ever Learn?

Hi Everyone,

So the Republicans had their shortened convention last week and I was really surprised by what Paul Ryan said during his speech. You would think that when someone has center stage to introduce himself to the entire nation, you would think that common sense would be paramount. Paul Ryan had the golden opportunity to say things that were unexceptionable. Not long after his speech, I began hearing and reading negative comments. Just so I wouldn't be accused of repeating what some say are the liberal leaning media, I went to the media that most supports the Republicans. I went to Fox News.

Sally Kohn, who is a writer and Fox News contributor, had some very interesting comments on the "facts" Ryan used in his speech on what he didn't say. The following is from Ms. Kohn's column. These are her words, not mine:

Ryan said that the downgrade of the United States' credit rating was because of President Obama.
Truth: The Republicans refused to increase the debt limit, which lead to the downgrading.

Ryan blamed President Obama for the closing of a GM plant in Janesville, Wisconsin.
Truth: The plant was closed under President George W. Bush.

Ryan stated that President Obama wants to give all the credit for private sector success to the government.
Truth: President Obama never said that.

Ryan said that President Obama took $716 billion out of Medicare.
Truth: $716 billion was the amount of savings in Medicare reimbursement rates, which incidentally, save Medicare recipients out-of-pocket costs, too. Ryan himself embraced these same savings in his budget.

So it seems that on his biggest day in his political life, Paul Ryan showed his real character. How can lying be a virtue? It isn't! But it is always a detriment. Why can't Republicans stand on their record and beliefs and not outright lies? Unfortunately, diehards will now believe whatever, just because Ryan or Romney said it. Honesty is a vital aspect of being a true and good leader. Maybe if Ryan had more common sense, he would not have said lies that he surely must have known would be fact-checked. But to be checked by Fox News and found to be lies, says a lot. Between the two of them, I haven't heard one speech that didn't contain at least one lie. Why is that?

Sally Kohn continued her column by stating that Ryan didn't talk about his extremist stance on banning all abortions, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Ryan also did not mention his plan to hand over Social Security to Wall Street. Ryan didn't mention his numerous votes to raise spending and balloon the deficit when George W. Bush was president. And finally, Ryan didn't mention how his budget would eviscerate programs that help the poor and raise taxes on 95% Americans in order to cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires even further and increase- yes increase, the deficit. So I have to ask, if these are such important issues to Ryan, why didn't he mention them? Oh right, I get it, Ryan's positions are such an extreme that they will become a detriment to the Romney-Ryan bid for the White House.

As a side note, I just read in today's newspaper that Ryan now says that he did not run a marathon in less than three hours as he claimed in a nationally broadcast interview. Ryan acknowledged yesterday that he had misstated his time by more than an hour. Seems his pattern of mis-statements just continues as usual. What a shame.

Lying is just plain stupid and shows a lack of moral character and a total lack of common sense. Isn't common sense an extremely important aspect we seek in our leaders? Please, please beware of and don't be fooled by sheep in wolf's clothing.

Til next week.

Peter

It's That Time Again

Hi Everyone,

In all of human history, from the cavemen/women to the present day, there have always been the haves and have nots. From our earliest times, some people had more food than other people. Some people also had better shelters than other people. Then when money was invented, there were always people who had more money then others. That tradition still continues through today. Today there are people who have more money then those who do not. So now we are in the every four year cycle of electing the next president of the United States. But just as history over time has repeated itself again and again, it seems that we have the opportunity of not letting history repeat itself again. But will we? Our two current presidential candidates seem to represent the old divide. One represents the haves and one represents the have nots. As always, both candidates say only he represents all of the people. So who represents whom? Today I will give you the facts regarding each and at the end, only you can determine, by voting, who is better to lead our country. May you choose wisely grasshopper.

If you don't believe what I say, check it out for yourself. So here we go..........

Our economy is in bad shape and is/was in the worst shape since the great Depression, hence the reason why this period of time is/was called the Great Recession. Bush II's policies including economic, 2 unpaid for wars that continue to this day, an unpaid medicare drug plan that continues to this day, deregulations etc. and etc., was the perfect recipe for what eventually started happen somtime in 2008, as our economy went into a tailspin. As a footnote, please, please check this out, every recession that has ever happened to this country since 1896, began with a Republican President in the White House. Coincidence? You decide. It really is true though! Also, do not forget that the Great Depression, which started in October 1929, did not really end until the late 1930's, when the Lend Lease program with Great Britain started. That one agreement put hundreds of thousands of mostly men to work in factories making the war materials they needed.

Unemployment is too high and will stay high and no candidate has any plan and or power that can really and truly help. Why? Because as long as the housing market stays stuck in the pits (interest rates continue to be low) and companies don't hire additional employees due to the fact that they are making better profit margins now with less employees. Companies have become so much more efficient in running their companies and have perfected the art of a no price/price increase. They decrease the amount of product and then charge you the same. You know what I mean, instead of a 64 oz carton of OJ, it is now 59oz for the same price. Their current mantra is why hire when they are so profitable and collectively sitting on hundreds of billions of dollars.

Banks are not loaning money out very easily. Almost every bank that received Bush II bailout of $750 billion without any strings attached, didn't loan out that money as intended, but instead invested it and made more money than ever before. Their ability to make unbelievable profits, from very risky bets, without making loans isn't going to change very easily. As long as they don't loan out as much money as they used to and instead make billions in profits from their speculative investments, why would they change? If elected, Romney wants to decrease regulations on banks. Obviously he hasn't learned anything what just happened with sub-prime mortgages.

In case you have forgotten, after the Reagan and Bush I years, this country had the largest deficit in our history. The deficit back then was in the trillions of dollars and we were then told that our grandchildren's children would still be paying it back. Amongst other things, Bill Clinton raised taxes on the 1%. And what happened? Within eight short years, our deficit was eliminated and was turned into a surplus, which Bush II inherited and then promptly squandered and turned it into another huge deficit which continues today. Clinton proved that raising taxes on the 1% wasn't a job killer, but rather a job creator. More jobs were created under Clinton than under Bush II even with higher taxes for the 1%. According to the Republicans that can't happen. Now with the majority of Republicans signing Grover Norquist's pledge to not raise taxes ever, especially on the 1%, which they will protect to no end, compromise is a bad thing and will never happen. It's their way or no way! See my 11/27/11 blog about good old boy Grover Norquist.

Now let's look at something different. When John Kennedy first decided to run for President, the Republicans were all up in arms about his Catholic religion. There had never been a Catholic President before Kennedy and Republicans were terrified that Kennedy's religious beliefs would affect and/or impede his decisions as President. It didn't happen and Kennedy was an excellent President. Today the Republicans have taken their own Catholic beliefs and want to instill those beliefs on the entire country, whether you are Catholic or not. How? Republicans now want to eliminate funding to Planned Parenthood and outlaw (including rape cases) or at the very least severely restrict legal abortions in any state that they can to circumvent Roe v Wade. I guess back room abortions are suppose to be a good thing when abortions are illegal in this countr,y as it was prior to Roe v Wade. There are now so many people who can't have children and adopt children from other countries. What will happen when there is an influx of hundreds of thousands of unwanted babies? Who will adopt them and who will pay for their care up to age 18 if they are not adopted? Taxpayers that who!

People seem to think that President Obama is somehow and somewhat responsible for the shortages that Social Security is experiencing. For some 35-40 years, SS always had a yearly surplus. But our wonderful politicians decided to use those yearly surpluses as a piggy bank to help balance budgets. If that money was never touched, there would be no SS shortages, period.

When Romney was Governor of Massachusetts, he considered himself a moderate Republican and stated such every chance he could. With the help of Democrats, he enacted his own Romney Care for his state. What people call Obama care is modeled almost exactly after Romney Care. But now since Romney has forgotten that he said he was a moderate and now says he has always been a conservative, he says that Obama care is a job killer. It wasn't a job killer in Massachusetts. But don't forget that Obama care doesn't really kick in until 2014. What has kicked in is that your child can be covered under a parents insurance plan until age 26. What a help to those young people who otherwise would be uninsured. Remember that insurance companies want to have more young people insured since, statistically, they are a healthier population and their premiums help offset the older populations costs. Now under Ryans budget plan, which the Tea Party wholeheartedly endorses and Romney will eventually have to endorse for fear of angering the conservatives, wants to turn Medicare into a voucher system for those 55 or younger. What that means is that retirees would have to purchase their own retirement insurance, at higher rates, since they are older and would later receive a voucher from the government that would pay a portion of their premiums. The seniors are liable for whatever the vouchers won't pay. That doesn't seem to be fair or right because the poor and middle classe may not be able to afford what is not paid by the voucher system. Then what happens?

Additionally, Ryan's budget plan would eliminate amongst other things, the Dept of Education and the EPA. I guess in the Republicans minds, education and environmental protection are not important and should be eliminated. Remember that the whole reason that the EPA exists is because left on their own, companies have no problem using up any and all resources and polluting any ground, water or air that they want. Is that what this country wants? I don't think so. We have only one planet and it needs to be protected from rogue companies that only care about their bottom lines.

Now if you still need more proof of who represents whom, Romney in his infinite wisdom, has decided to only release his 2010 and 2011 tax returns, which is what the federal law requires. Other presidential candidates have released up to 10 years including McCain and Romney's father, George when he ran for preisdent. But, not Mitt Romney. He has used for years, off shore accounts to hide his assets and pay a nominal percentage of taxes. Off shore accounts are used for only one purpose, to pay less if any taxes. For the 2 years of returns that he released, 2010 and 2011, the average tax rate that he paid was just 13%. Do any of you pay a 13% tax rate? I think not. Romney is well aware that if he releases more tax returns, people will see what he was up to when it came time to pay his fair share. He hasn't paid his fair share in years and years. But that is the way he likes it. In case you were not aware, Romney wants to decrease the tax rate for the 1% even more. The Bush II tax decreases were suppose to create more jobs, but did it? All you have to do is check out the DOL figures for when Bush II was in office up to present and guess what you will find? No increase in total job creation but a decrease during his 8 years. So why are Republicans still trying to keep the present rate and even decrease it? It makes no sense what so ever, except in their minds.

Romney touts his business experience as what is needed to help pull our country out of the Great Recession. Ever checked out Bain Capitol? Bain did create a few jobs, but mostly at its corporate headquarters. But their business was to buy companies at a low price in order to be able to sell them for a profit. How do they do that? By dismantling the company, in order to sell off its parts and lay off a whole lot of the employees. Have you ever heard of a company who buys another company and doesn't lay off employees? Oh right, you haven't heard of it because it doesn't normally happen in 90% plus of company takeovers. Bain also transferred thousands and thousands of jobs, especially manufacturing jobs overseas that will never return to our shores. This is the business experience that he says will help us. I think not! But Romney says he wasn't CEO when jobs were sent overseas. If that is true why was he still signing letters and legal documents as its CEO during that time?

I would be the first person in line to say that our economy is not improving as well as it should be under President Obama, but remember, our country used to be based on a huge manufacturing sector which now unfortunately doesn't exist. Our econonmy now is based on our being a service economy with people having to spend more on services and not necessarily buying products that are not made in the US of A in order to improve our economy and break us out of this recession. What this country needs is more of a manufacturing base, instead of a service base. Don't believe me, check out China.

Finally, I was absolutely flabbergasted to learn that in the infinite wisdom of Republicans, it is a good idea to have tough new voter identification laws in place by this November. These new laws will make it more difficult for the elderly, disabled, poor and young adults to vote, because each voter would have to show a vaild photo ID. These people don't usually have photo ID's since they don't drive. Having worked for the Board of Elections for the past 10 years, I can tell you personally, that there is absolutley no problem with in-person voter fraud. Even the government says there is no porblem. But the Republicans think there is a problem. What I can also tell you is that these people are part of President Obama's base and the Republicans want to take away those voters rights, which is supposed to be protected by our constitution. But the Republicans pretense is to prevent voter fraud. So I guess that the perceived voter fraud only happens in red states. What a back door way to try to win an election. State Supreme Courts should shoot down these blatant attempts to steal, yes steal, the elections in November. Only you, voters, can stop the insanity by voting in November.

So now I have informed you of who represents whom in this upcoming election. Don't be fooled by the blatant lies, inuendos and dirty pool by what the Republicans will say and do. They will say anything to get elected. Remember the 2003 Bush II lie about how only the Republicans could protect us from another terroist attack? They didn't protect us from 9/11/01 did they? Don't believe what I said above, just check it out for yourself. But don't believe any online stuff. Check it out with major newspapers, where they get sued for misrepresentations and lies. Online writers are not held to the same standards and can and do say whatever they want because they believe the ends justify the means

Now you know, don't let let history repeat itself, choose wisely and vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you don't vote, you have absolutely no right to bitch about the outcome and keep your thoughts to yourself.

Til next week.

Peter

Please Beware! How To Avoid Being Scammed

Hi Everyone,

My wife and I were at a pool party yesterday and I again heard a very familiar story. Today's blog is geared to the older generations, who are the easiest to fall victim.

The story we were told yesterday was how this elderly, but still very active both physically and mentally woman, was scammed out of money, by paying in full upfront for work that was never performed. The elderly get scammed more often than younger folks. I would like to give some common sense advice for when any type of work needs to be done on their homes. So here is my top 10, plus one list:

1) If you don't know who to call, ask your neighbors, family and friends for people/companies who they have used and (this is very important), would use again.

2) Get at least 3 quotes. Remember that the cheapest quote is not always the best. If one quote is far less then the others, get another quote from another company.

3) Ads can be very misleading as to their performance level and professionalism so be careful when calling them.

4) Ask companies for references, but remember that they are only going to give you their best ones, not the ones who had problems.

5) Do your homework. Call their references and ask very pointed questions regarding what they did  and how that relates to the job you want done.

6) Call your local Better Business Bureau and get any info they have on the company. You can even check Angies list online

7) Go to the government agency in your county i.e.: consumer affairs etc., that holds the contractors license and get any info that they may have. Also make sure that the contractor's insurance policies are in effect during the duration of the job. At the least they should carry, Worker's Compensation and Liability insurance.

8) Once you have chosen a contractor, depending on the job will depend of whether any up front money will be due. For the most part, any small job should be paid in full only at the completion of the job and never pay upfront.

9) If you have to sign a contract, make sure that your interests are covered like; amount of money to be paid up front, then at 50-75% of job completion and the final payment to be made only after your approval of the job completion. Also make sure that start and end dates are included. The best contracts have daily or weekly penalties if the job is not finished on the agreed upon time.

10) Make sure that the contractor follows the signed contract and that they do not use any cheaper materials or short cuts. That means that you have to watch the job while in progress.

Plus One) And last but certainly not least; NEVER, EVER use a contractor who shows up at your door uninvited, even their price seems to be to good to be true, that's because it is a scam.

By using common sense, most people can avoid the pitfalls of being scammed out of your hard earned money.

Til next week.

Peter

USPS

Hi Everyone,

For a couple of years now I have been reading and hearing about how unprofitable the United States Postal Service has become. Because the USPS does not receive any taxpayer assistance, the USPS must be run like any other business. Being profitable is of the utmost importance or so you would think.

The decrease in USPS revenues is not a unforeseen occurrence. More and more people are paying bills on line. Less and less people actually write letters to friends etc. And when was the last time that you ordered something from a company that was delivered to you via the USPS? I can't remember any company using the USPS instead of UPS or FedEx or even the old DHL. So with at least those problems facing the USPS, you would think that they must be running it as efficiently as possible? Yea right! Due to the fact the we do not go to our local post office very often any more, I was surprised at what I found missing from ours.

For as long as I can remember, post offices always had at least 2 mail slots in which to mail your letters and bills etc. There was always a slot for out-of-town mail and one for in-town mail. Well lo and behold, when I visited my post office, the slot for in-town mail was permanently, covered over. All mail, both in-town and out-of-town mail went onto the one slot. When our daughter recently mailed some thank you notes, including some local ones, one of the local notes was returned due to an incorrect address. What surprised me was that the USPS postmark was from a city over 30 miles away. What? That meant that the locally addressed mail that she mailed from our local post office was driven 30 miles away, sorted at some USPS sorting location and driven back another 30 miles. Let me think about that one for a moment........ I know that no one really uses snail mail for many things, but just bear with me for a second; in order to mail say an invitation to a friend in the same town that we live in, it has to travel 60 miles instead of 2-3 miles. Can someone please tell me where the common sense is in doing it the USPS way? Oh yea, there is no common sense involved here. I just don't get why the USPS doesn't see the problem. To me the no brainer, common sense solution is to bring back the 2 mail slots. But I doubt that will happen any time soon.

Til next week.

Peter

Stop The Insanity

Hi Everyone,

The 7/21 horrendous massacre in a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado should have never, ever have happened. What I am about to say will anger many people, but it needs to be said again and again until the situation is corrected.

So I have some questions. Why is it still legal to purchase an AR-15 assault rifle? Why is it also still legal to be able to buy: military smoke canisters, bullet proof vests, thousands and thousands of rounds of ammunition in one purchase, Kevlar helmets and neck and groin protection? Let's start with the rifle first. Doesn't just the name of it suggest what it is used for? An AR-15 assault rifle is made to kill people. Who takes an AR-15 or AK-47 rifle hunting? No one. Its sole purpose is to kill and injure as many people as possible in a short period of time. Additionally, why do law abiding people need body armor protection. For protection while they are hunting animals who don't have guns? I think not. Body armor has only one use and that is for protection from bullets flying at you. In my wildest imagination, I never thought someone could purchase thousands of bullets at once.

Even though background checks are mandatory that all dealers must do prior to selling any firearms, that doesn't prevent a law abiding person from doing something like what happened in Aurora. FYI,  private owners are legally allowed to sell any type of firearms to another person. So how is it possible to buy all this stuff? Well you can thank, take your pick: the 2nd amendment, the NRA and the U.S. Supreme Court for allowing this to continue. Someone along the line, this country has confused the right to bear arms with the supposed right to bear assault weapons that are used to kill people. When will this insanity end?

I was hoping that President Obama and or Mitt Romney would say something about this problem. They both acknowledged the tragic incident, but both of them failed to say one word about opening up dialogue regarding banning assault weapons. Both are obviously afraid of what the NRA would do to them in this election year. I just don't understand why it is so important that people should be able to own assault weaponry? That makes no sense to me. Why aren't people screaming out their windows that they are mad as hell and they aren't going to take this anymore?!

This issue should not be a political issue, but yet it is, unfortunately thanks to the NRA and a lot of republican backers. But I suppose it always will be a political issue. My common sense solution is simple and straight forward: make it illegal to purchase and or own any type of assault weapon that has the ability to shoot multiple rounds while holding the trigger. I would also make it illegal to purchase any type of body armor protection - period. Additionally, there must be some kind of limit in the amount of bullets one buys. There should also be a ban making it illegal to post anything online about how to make any kind of explosives. Until something is done about assault weapons, we should not be surprised when unfortunately another Aurora occurs. STOP THIS INSANITY!

Til next week.

Peter

When Will They Learn

Hi Everyone,

It happened again on 7/4/12 and this time all 24 people on board the bus, including the driver were injured. The bus driver was actually found on the shoulder of I-95 about 150 yards behind the bus. I don't know how he got there. There was another terrible bus accident on I-95 on 3/12/11 that killed 15 people and injured another 18. During the past few years there seems to be an increase in the number of chartered bus/tour bus company accidents between Boston and Washington DC. What disturbs me about these accidents, is that I believe that each and every one of them could have been prevented. I found many similarities between all of the accidents. Once I figured out the similarities, I used my common sense to come up with a solution that would saves lives.

So these are the similarities:

1) All of the accidents occurred on or near the I-95 corridor, between Boston and Washington, D.C.

2) The large majority of the accidents occurred in the early morning hours.

3) Lack of sleep and speed were involved in all.

4) The majority of the accidents happened after the buses left either a Connecticut or New Jersey casino in the early morning hours i.e.: 4:14 am and 4:45 am.

5) The majority of the corporate owners have been cited for safety violations.

So these are my common sense solutions that would save lives:

First of all, why is it so important to have buses leave a casino at 4:00 am? So gamblers can get to work that day? This practice should stop and the last buses should leave at midnight or even earlier. Then tiredness should not be a factor. I am not sure what it is called, but a GPS like unit should be installed in all charter and tour buses, so that the companies can find out which drivers speed and progressive disciplinary action up to and including termination should be either implemented or strictly enforced. Finally, if a company receives a certain number of citations, they should lose their license to operate for a period a time. If the companies still don't get it, their license to operate should be revoked, period, end of story. I don't think any of my solutions will be used any time soon, which is really unfortunate. How many more injuries and deaths have to happen before any real changes are implemented?

Til next week.

Peter

Have You Checked Yours Lately?

Hi Everyone,

As the title of today's blog asks, have you checked yours lately? I am talking about the interest rates on your savings or CD accounts. It is hard to swallow when banks offer "high value" interest rates of around one half of one percent or 0.50%. Where is the high value? Higher then zero percent? The prime interest rate is stuck at the historical low rate of 3.25%. But, are you aware that the prime rate has been at 3.25% since 12/16/2008? Can you remember how much the interest rates were in your accounts during the years 2008,09,10,11 and 2012? Don't remember? That's ok, because I am pretty sure that what you do remember is that your savings and CD interest rates that you received have dropped substantially since 2008. I just read an ad for a bank that is offering 1.20% for a 3 year CD. If memory serves me correctly, back in 2008 you could get a 1 year CD with a 5.00% interest rate. What has happened?

Back in the day, bank savings and CD rates raised or lowered interest rates when the prime rate went up or down. That made sense. But wait, the prime rate hasn't changed in more then 3 1/2 years. If the prime rate hasn't been lowered since 2008, why have the rates gone down hill? According to what I have read on the subject, it seems that even though the big bank bailout times 2, stopped the bleeding it didn't stop the banks from hoarding the TARP money and not loaning it out. So what is the reason? Oh yea........their hunger for more money. Now some people say that federal regulations is the cause, but the important regulations like the Volker rule has not been passed. The credit card regulations should have nothing to do with interest rates on savings. I truly believe that banks have learned very well from the airline industry. Flying now is like an a la carte experience. They charge extra for anything and everything they can i.e.: pillows, blankets, carry on luggage, weight of checked baggage and where you sit, etc., etc. So now banks are charging excessive fees and lowering savings rates for the sole purpose on making more and more money.

I have a great common sense idea. Since banks need lots of money to invest, why not entice existing and new customers to deposit their hard earned money with the bank by offering higher than normal interest rates? Say 1.50% or even higher. The bank(s) would receive a new influx of money that would most likely beat their current amounts. Even though they would pay a higher interest rate, they would more than make up for it with their new investments. Unfortunately, bankers haved proved time and time again, that they don't have a lot of common sense. Just wait, someday soon, one bank will realize this and do it.

Til next week.

Peter

WHAT???????

Hi Everyone:

Just when I think I have read about all of the lack of common sense things that people, companies and politicians do, this one certainly takes the cake and is right on the top of the heap of?. When I tell you this story, you will not believe it and then you will scratch your head and say it couldn't happen. Well, it did happen and this story is true. I read the story in my Gannett newspaper.

Anyone who has bought a house, knows that the price that you pay for the house is the basis for the school and property, (city and/or, county and/or town or village) taxes that you will pay. That has been the system for eons and is correct in using that selling price to determine the tax assessment of that building. Well, well, well, it seems that the Town of Greenburgh, located in Westchester County, in New York State, doesn't base their tax assessments on the price that you just paid for your abode. The story goes like this: A couple bought their house on April 23, 2012, for $580,000. Unfortunately for the couple, the town has assessed their home at $1.3 million and they are sticking to it. That is more then twice the value of what they just paid for the house. How can this be?

Fairness in the property-tax system is based on homeowners paying a portion of their property's fair-market value. In this case, fair market value is the price that they paid for the home, which was $580,000 and not the absurdly inflated amount of $1.3 million. Their recourse is to file a case on "tax grievance day". Having done that numerous times on our own home, as long as you have 3 comparable similar homes, (including the lot size), that are assessed lower than your own, you will win a decrease in your assessment. It is just that simple. I have never lost an assessment grievance for ourselves and our friends. What amazes me is that, the tax assessor did not lower the value of the house to the price paid when it was filed. But since he/she didn't, even if the homeowners win their grievance, the most reduction that they can receive is 25%. Another stupid rule that makes no sense. The couple is seeking a 55% reduction, but they can't and won't get the additional 30%. Oh boy, if that isn't a rip off, what is?

The failure of municipalities to periodically revalue their properties has left many homeowners with assessments that do not reflect what the house would sell for in the open market. Greenburgh's last revaluation was in 1956. The politicians know how to fix this problem, but it has always been a hot potato and therefore nothing has been fixed since 1956. Where is the common sense here? Oh right, there isn't any.

Again for the umpteenth time, politicians don't seem to be able to get it right. It is and always will be all about their re-election and not what's good for the people that they say they represent.

Til next week.

Peter

What Does Retire Mean?

Hi Everyone,

What do you think the definition of retire is? Webster's definitions that apply to today's blog are: 1) having discontinued work after long service. 2) withdraw from business or public life. 3) make inactive; relieve of duty. The definition of retire seems to be pretty cut and dry doesn't it? It is either black or white with no gray matter in between. Under normal circumstances that would be correct, until you mention New York State. It is painfully apparent that NYS politicians do not know what the meaning of retire is.

I previously blogged in 2009 about the huge problem NYSwas and still is facing with high pension costs from high (bloated) salaries reported during employees final 3 years before retiring and double dippers. But having double dippers, (NYS employees who have retired and receive their pensions and then go back to work for the state and collect a salary) makes no sense at all. To make matters even worse, there are 15 NYS lawmakers (both Republicans and Democrats) who collect both. Come on, either you are working for the state or you are retired from working for the state. Their should be no in betweens. You should not be allowed to collect a pension and a salary together. Just since 2011, there has been a whopping 32 percent increase in state employees who collect both their pensions and a salary. When will this madness end?

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that it should not be legal to collect both a pension and a salary simultaneously. Isn't this an abuse of taxpayer money? Why can't politicians see this problem and solve it? Why isn't there an uproar over this bad policy? Citizens of New York need to know that this is happening and to try to have it stopped once and for all. Politicians never cease to amaze me! They have a take, take mentality.

Til next week.

Peter

Innie or Outie?

Hi Everyone,

A while back, I watched a show on HDTV, (don't recall the name of the show), but it was about building hurricane proof homes. I remember that the house was circular which helped high winds go around the house. I also remember that the front and rear doors opened outwardly. When you think about it, if you live in a hurricane prone area, wouldn't it just make common sense to have exterior doors that open outwardly instead of inwardly? When exterior doors open outwardly, external winds can not blow open the door, which leads to more severe interior damage.

I know a lot of people in this country don't like the government interfering with their lives. But if you think about it, wouldn't it be better protection for one's life, famly's lives and property if there were things you could do to better safe guard in case of a hurricane? But what if states passed laws that prohibited inwardly opening doors at all shore line communities and then another 50 miles inland? The addition of outward opening exterior doors, along with other safety precautions, (for high winds) would dramatically reduce insurance claims. That would then reduce insurance premiums.

I do realize that there are issues with outwardly opening doors. For instance, preventing the door from hitting the house when a small to moderate breeze tries to blow the door off the hinges. That could be an easy fix. But another issue is that the door would be subject to the elements and no one wants the interior part of the door to be soaking wet. So yes there are drawbacks, but isn't a safety feature more important then some inconveniences? If I lived in a hurricane prone area, common sense tells me that I would rather have the outwardly opening door than an inwardly one. I would opt for safety every time.

Til next week.

Peter

An Oops Moment

Hi Everyone,

Like many of you, before we buy something, we do our homework to determine what is the best product for the best price. The best price doesn't always mean the least expensive. Our latest endeavor is to find one of those large outdoor storage containers for the outdoor cushions. It is unbelieveable how many choices there are. After doing some internet research, it was time to go out to the brick and morter stores to look and touch and make the final determination.

My travels landed me at the local Home Depot store. I went to the area where they had the outdoor living room, patio and cushions on display. I searched for the containers to no avail. I finally asked an employee and I was told that they were located in the outside garden area. I walked around the garden area an finally found the display of the 6 or so containers. Much to my dismay, half of the containers were located on a shelf about 5 feet high. The rest of the containers were on the second shelf that must have been about 8 feet high. This created a bit of a dilemma for me. Obviously I would not be able to check them out without the assistance of employees with at least a ladder or a forklift. I found an employee and showed him which containers I wanted taken down for my closer inspection. The employee thought about my request and replied that instead of him taking them down, if I just picked the one I wanted he would deduct $10. I told him that I was considering 2, one of which was a Rubbermaid one. He immediately said that he would take off $20, making it comparable to the lower price one. Since I had already done my homework and liked the Rubbermaid product, I picked it. Since the one I picked was up on a shelf, he told me that he would get it down and take it to customer service with the new lower price. I agreed and then went to have a key made.

By the time I returned to customer service, I saw my container there and told the employee that I wanted to pay for it. I asked for the $20 discount and the employee asked why? I told her the story and she said that the employee needed to tell her that. She radioed the employee who confirmed the $20 discount. Now don't get me wrong, I love an extra discount just like the next person and it came as a complete surprise. What I don't get is why they don't dispay them on the floor like every other store does? Having the containers at such a height where only a center from the NBA would be able to check them out made absolutely no sense. Common sense would tell me that they should be displayed on the floor. If every person interested in purchasing one received a $20 discount, Home Depot's profit margin on that product definitely decreased.

I benefited from the lack of common sense on Home Depot's part. Now that doesn't happen very often. But I'll take the discount anytime.

Til next week.

Peter

Throw Away Society

Hi Everyone,

For about 20 years or so, we have been living in a throw away society. We buy things that are used either once or for a limited time and then we throw it away. There are even other things that we buy that if taken care of, would last a lot longer. Some examples are: lawnmowers, leaf blowers, chainsaws, patio furniture and even cars.

We all know people who buy something new and in a short time, they look old and don't run or work like they used to. If they had only taken care of them, they wouldn't have to replace them prematurely. I have even known people who can't seem to keep a car in tip top shape after 3 or 4 years. Of course they then either have to pay a huge bill to their mechanic to repair it or they get rid of it in order to get a new or used one.

I have always been a practioner of taking care of everything that we buy. We have a beautiful and large patio table and chairs that are 11 years old and still looks new. They get taken into the garage during the winter to protect them. I had a leaf blower that lasted 19 years. I had a chainsaw last me 29 years until dry rot and an unavailability of replacement parts forced me to buy a new one. Believe me when I tell you that, that chainsaw had a huge workout during its lifetime, including cutting some 65 cords of wood. I also still have a car that I got new and is now 26 years old and still going strong with almost 300,000 miles on it. Although it is no longer a daily driver, it looks and drives like new and when I show it at car shows, people are amazed. With each of those purchases, I read the owner's manual and followed the instructions to keep them all running and looking like new. In this day and age, everytime you have to replace one of those products, you face sticker shock at the cost. Maintaining your things will save you a lot of money over the life time of its use. Common sense has proven to me time after time that taking care of your things is the most efficient way to go. In addition to the fact that you save money, you also get to wear a badge of honor with your friends and repair businesses when you tell and/or show them.

Think about it. Til next week.

Peter

Say it A'int So, Again

Hi everyone,

I know that I have written about this before, but I feel that it needs to be repeated. I have said so many, many times before, that I have lost count about how politicians don't have any common sense, what so ever! For the majority of politicians, a prequisite to going into politics is, no matter what your age, seems to have never learned about what common sense is. This leads to not being able to use any common sense, since they haven't learned it. I watched today's Sunday morning TV news programs and again, I am so very disappointed.

An interveiw is supposed to work something like this; (correct me if I am wrong), one person asks a series of questions and the other person or maybe persons, are supposed to answer the questions. Seems straight forward and simple enough, don't you agree? Except when it is election season, which seems to be a 24/7/365 affair, that is not how interviews go. Ok, ok, I should take that back and say only 50% of the interviews go that way. Half? Well, there is always a news person/interviewer, but on these shows they are called moderators, who ask the questions just like an interview should go. But when the other person, which is always a politican, answers the question, there is no real answer. Rather, there is a beating around the bush, while adding some prerehearsed comment to deflect the real answer which might and probably would hurt their cause. There are no direct and truthful to the point answers. I find this type of interview extremely frustrating and exhausting to watch. It gives the appearance, maybe rightfully so, that the politicians are more interested in getting whatever message they want to get out and to hell with the content as it pertains to the actual question(s).

Most politicians on both sides of the aisle do this as common practice without using any common sense. Just because it is a common practice, doesn't mean that it is a best practice. It is obviously a worst practice and should be discontinued immediately. Questions should be answered to the point, truthfully and with facts. No made up facts, no spin, no lies and no deceptions, period. Name calling should also be included. It is a sad state of affairs that this happens over and over and again and again with no end in sight. When will politicians realize that the American people really wants direct, truthful and to the point answers. Nothing else should be acceptable. I know, I know that this type of answer won't end any time soon, but I can still hope!

Til next week.

Peter

When is a Secret Not a Secret?

Hi Everyone,

By now, I'm sure you have all heard about the Secret Sevice scandal that happened in Cartagena, Mexico. The Secret Service agents that were involved are not assigned to protecting our President. These are a special group of agents that arrive way inadvance of the President's arrival. They are there to secure the locations that the President will visit. This includes securing and debugging the entire floor of the hotel where the President will stay. They take every precaution to insure the President's safety. So far there are at least 11 Secret Service agents and an unknown number of marines involved.

So how can Secret Service agents and some Marines think that hiring prostitutes is a good thing to do? They can't!!! Where were the supervisors? Two on site supervisors have already departed from the agency.There is no justification for their actions. You would think that being part of an elite force would mean that they had and used great common sense. Obviously, these agents and military personnel have absolutely no common sense at all! Duh!!! You know that they swear to protect the President, even to the point of putting their own lives on the line. I guess that hiring prositutes isn't considered detrimental to the mission they were on. Hmmmmmm.... let me think about that one. Not being an historian expert, I do believe that ever since there has been prostitution, prostitutes have been used to solicit info and secrets for a person, agency or government who hired them. Consequently, the actions of these people could have seriously jeopardized and put in harms way, our President and all those who traveled with them.

Even when you think that the lack of common sense in this story could not possibly stoop any lower, it does when this sorted tale gets even worse. According to multiple news outlets, when one of the prostitutes asked for her money, the guy tried to short change her and she would have none of that. She then made a commotion which got the hotel security and police involved. Oh come on! Wasn't it bad enough that he hired a prostitute, but to try to cheat her out of her money? Anyone knows that was not going to end nicely, with the prostitute just walking away. It really gets my goat when specialized personnel of the elite Secret Service and the Marines to boot, does something so egregious and down right just plain stupid that defies any resemblance of logic. Any personnel found to be involved in this, should loose their job and be banned from any other agency like the: CIA, FBI, ATF etc., etc., end of story!

Til next week.

Peter

The Tax Man Cometh Again and Again?

Hi Everyone,

I have a problem with our tax system which includes: federal, state, local and school. The entire system is broken and needs to be overhauled, sooner rather then later and a fairer system should be implemented. But what I am most upset with is, New York state's income tax. We work hard every day, week, month and year and in this economy, if you have a job, you thank your lucky stars. Each time you receive your pay check you see all the taxes that are deducted. Like: federal income taxes, social security, medicare and your state's unemployment tax. Here in New York state, like many other states, money is also deducted for New York state income tax. Obviously, that means that we pay taxes on all of our income, so that New York state gets its money.

Then comes April and it's that time of year to do your yearly income taxes. You add up all of your income, calculate your deductions and poof, you either owe more money to the feds or your state or both, or you get a refund. There in lies my problem with New York state. If you get a New York state refund, that amount of money is then used as income for the following year's taxes. Come on, didn't we already pay taxes on that money? Yes of course! But, besides the fact that New York got the use of our money (refund) for free they then tax us on it the following year as income. Where is the fairness in that? By anyone's definition this is called double taxation. How come you can't be tried in a court of law twice for the same crime, (double jeopardy), but double taxation is legal? I am not sure if anyone has tried to sue the state on the double taxation issue, if not someone should.

There was no common sense used when taxing refunds became part of New York state's tax code. This just makes no sense unless.......wait for it........ you were a politician who decided to add this ridiculous tax to fill some budget deficit of many, many years ago. New Yorkers are already paying very high taxes. If New York is serious about tax reform, start with eliminating this double taxation flaw.

I guess there really isn't any free money!

Til next week.

Peter

This could kill you and or a loved one

Hi Everyone,

Does today's topic title seem to be dire? Well, unfortunately it is! Each and every year thousands of humans are killed by it and there seems to be no end to it. What really bothers me is that people don't take it seriously enough and that is when it can kill them. Sometimes without even a warning. It can be the most gentle of things and at other times it can even make mountains into mole hills. The insideous thing about it is that in moderation it actually helps us, but, over indulge in it and it will kill you.

Unfortunately, in this country, Republicans have no plans to combact this killer. But on the other side of the aisle, the Democratics also have no plans. Why not? This has been a problem to people and animals since the creation of the world. So why hasn't someone, some company or some country found a way to arrest this issue? People don't believe there is a problem until they are faced with it and their potential demise. By then a solution may be too late for them.

What is this problem, that it is so wide spread and found around our entire planet???? It is called dihydrogen monoxide. As I said before, this stuff, dihydrogen monoxide, is crucial to all living things on earth. But too much of it can and will kill you in a matter of seconds. Where is the big government agency to help set up guidelines to help protect us all from getting too much of it? There is really only one reason and one reason alone. That is because dihydrogen monoxide is really H2O or water!! April fools!!! Did I get you?

Til next week.

Peter

Not Subject to Doubling

Hi Everyone,

And so it goes, that either every day, week or month you find another surprise that catches you off guard a bit. I'm not talking about some big life altering surprise. But a surprise that just creeps up on you.

Being a coupon using house, a while ago my wife and I started to notice that some coupons had a Do Not Double exclusion printed on them. Now, it seems that the majority of coupons are Do Not Double. Not sure about where you all live, but around where we live, all grocery stores double the value of coupons up to and including 99 cents. We don't even see many 99 cents coupons around here anymore. The highest cents off coupons we find are for 75 cents. The bottom line here is that the big companies like: Kraft and General foods etc. have found another way to pad their already heavily padded bottom lines.

There are still so many people having a hard time making ends meet. Regularly using coupons can really lower your food bill, especially if you use the coupons when the products are on sale. That is a win win situation. Unfortunately it is painfully obvious that the companies have the right to make coupons not eligible to be doubled. But these are the same companies that now sell almost everything in smaller sizes and weight etc., but charge the same amount as their older predecessors, or even more now. They said it was so they wouldn't raise their prices. It just leaves a bad taste in your mouth. Now isn't the time to eliminate coupon doubling. It doesn't make common sense, oh wait......... unless you are the big company and in their eyes, it is just another way to make more money by making us pay more.

Til next week.

Peter