Safety Not Required!

Hi everyone,

I heard on the news the other day, about the success of a new bicycle rental program in NYC. In the first seven weeks of the program over 1,000,000 bicycles have been rented. To date, the bike rental program has over 180,000 members. So far, the bikes that have been rented have clocked over 2,500,000 miles. Those are absolutely impressive numbers for a new program that just began seven weeks ago. With a city the size of the Big Apple, I expect that those numbers will multiply like rabbits. Even though there is some controversy over the placement of some of the rental locations, I believe on a whole, that the program will be beneficial to the company that owns the bikes. But will it also be beneficial to people who rent them? You would think so, but think again.

The most important safety feature that I believe should come with every bike rental doesn't. The safety feature is a helmet. Yes it is true that none of these bike rentals, rent helmets also. Helmets are not required. Of all places to ride a bike, it is even more important to wear a helmet in a highly congested area like NYC. All it will take is that one bike accident where the renter falls off a bike, or gets hit by some kind of motorized vehicle and hits their head. The lawsuits will fly fast and furious. Now, just to make sure that you understand, there are signs by the bike rentals that suggest helmets should be worn. But it is only a suggestion, not mandated. Where is their common sense regarding the proven aspect of wearing helmets can and do save lives? Oh right, they obviously don't have any. Shame on NYC for allowing such a business without including helmets to go along with each and every bike rental.

Okay, okay, I know some of you are probably thinking about how gross it would be to wear someone else's helmet. I would have to agree with you on that. What if the previous rider had lice or something worse? If there is even such a thing. Well, why can't the makers of helmets, make them with removable/disposable liners. Wouldn't that solve that problem? I think so. The obvious increase in the cost of the liners would increase the rental cost. But, wouldn't that be better than not wearing a helmet? Common sense says, no demands that bike riders should wear helmets. Eventually, the company and NYC will learn that lesson, probably sooner rather than later.

Til next week.

Peter

The Epitome of Stupidity

Hi Everyone,

If no other post that I have previously done proved an utter lack of common sense, today's blog most certainly will. As usual, the regular idiots in this true and scary story are, wait for it................drum roll please............. politicians! Yes that's right, the inevitable politician is again at the center of stupidity.

In Westchester County, just north of NYC, Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino, who happens to be a Republican and his administration, is currently negotiating a no bid, five year contract with Liberty Lines to run the county's Bee-Line bus system. FYI, Liberty Lines has operated Westchester's bus system for some 40 odd years. I always thought that the contract was put out to bid and Liberty Lines always won. But boy was I soooooooo wrong. The operating of the bus system has never, ever been open to bids. You would think that bidding out the contract would make a lot of common sense and have the potential to save tax payers a ton of money. But for whatever reason(s), saving tax payers money is never seems to be high on the agenda.

What makes this contract, this time, so different from any other time? The US Federal Transit Administration has now told Westchester County, that it had to put the $103 million contract out to bid or else loose federal transit aid. So how much aid is involved here? A whopping $19 million!!! That's almost 20% of the total cost of running the system. The contract doesn't even include the operator having to buy or maintain any buses. The contract is strictly for manpower to run the system. So how can Westchester County even contemplate such a huge loss of operating money? Why? Why? Why? There must be a reason for them to keep negotiating with Liberty. Westchester County even extended their notification deadline to Liberty Lines from 7/1 to 7/19. That decision in and of itself shows their lack of common sense. But, for them to continue negotiations is mind boggling. Any person with just an ounce of common sense would say put it out to bid. Why risk the $19 million? I can't think of any legitimate reason not to put it out to bid, can you? Maybe someone's palm or palms are being greased? Who knows? All I do know is that Astorino and is administration is, are the new poster child(ren) for politicians that lack any common sense what so ever. Losing federal aid is a colossal mistake with big tax increases looming. What a way to stick it to the people by the party that says they are never for new tax increases, ever!? Maybe except for Westchester County and wherever else?

Til next week.

Peter

Is This The Way It Is Suppose To Be?

Hi Everyone,

Every once in a blue moon, I read something that really makes me scratch my head in disbelief. I am fully aware that people seem to have a favorite news channel that they watch more then any other. I also understand that people believe that certain news channels sway more to one political party or the other. But when it comes to right and wrong, no news channel should be immune.

According to the HuffPost, Fox Business Network rejected a TV ad created by a women's rights group that calls for pundits Lou Dobbs, Erick Erickson and Juan Williams to be fired for negative remarks they made on the network a few weeks ago about women who work outside the home.

Ultraviolet, an online community that advocates for women's equality, created the the ad using Fox Business' own footage of Dobbs, Williams and Erickson complaining that the rise of female breadwinners in families will ruin our society, hurt children and undermine social order. Really? What planet do those three come from? How soon can they can deported back to that planet? How can anyone say something like that? That is the utmost diss to women that I have heard in a while.

FYI, a spokesperson for Fox News did not respond to HuffPost's requests for comment. In my opinion, if Fox News rejected the ad, refused to fire the three stupidos for their comments and even refused to apologize means nothing other then they approve of the their sexist views. Don't you agree? If they are allowed to continue to say anything they want without fear of repercussions, what's to stop them from making other more incendiary statements? Right, absolutely nothing.

Even though their statements were outright lies, the bigger picture should be just as concerning to all who watch Fox News. Is that the kind of news channel that you want to watch? Fox News is now as much to blame and has as much common sense as the three stupidos, which is none. Fox has again shown their true colors by not at the very least reprimanding the three and by not even putting out a statement. People should boycott Fox News for this reason. They have no business allowing such statements on their shows.

Now if you continue to watch Fox News, you too are then sending a message to the network that the statements were OK. Do you really think the statements are OK? If not, stop watching. That will send a message to Fox News that they will hear. It is all about viewer numbers.

Til next week.

Peter

What a Great Deal!

Hi Everyone,

Have I got a great deal to tell you all. In order for it to effect any of you, there is only one prerequisite and that is you must work in the public school system here in the wonderful state of New York. The following is a true story and if it doesn't get you mad, it very well should.

Blind Brook and Rye, New York is located in Westchester County. The area is a well off community. William Stark, 66 is the school superintendent of the Blind Brook-Rye school system. On June 30th, 2013, Stark is retiring from his job. Then on July 3rd, he will be rehired by the same school system with the same $260,000 salary. Because he retired, he will then receive his pension. His pension amount is almost $200,000 per year. That is a total compensation package of almost $460,000 per year. Maybe your first question is, is this legal? Well, here in New York state, it is unbelievably legal. I get so mad when I hear about loopholes in laws that allow this kind of abuse. It also really gets my goat when, during school board budget votes, these same retired but still working administrators state that the reason for higher taxes is due to unfunded state mandated programs. They are right, because of a loophole where they also contribute to the problem when it is to their advantage and complain when it is not to their advantage.

The school board which approved the deal, will on the surface seem to save local tax dollars like: expenses related to health care and unbelievably, pension expenses. But this deal is a bad one for all the taxpayers due to the fact that they now have to pick up the $200,000 state pension for someone still working. This is so beyond absurd, it is mind boggling. Why can't Albany fix this glaring problem? Oh right, they are politicians who don't care because they let it continue and continue.

Shame on the lawmakers who wrote the bill, with the loophole, that became a law. Shame on Albany for not fixing the loophole and shame on the employees who use the system to their greed based benefit and cost the taxpayers more money. And I thought schools taught about morality. I guess not!

Where is common sense when you need it?

Til next week.

Peter

What To Do When It Affects Your State

Hi All,

Sometimes I ask myself why do so many politicians say one thing and then do a 180 degree opposite. Seems to me that politicians will say whatever, to either get elected or re-elected.

Last year, Hurricane Sandy struck the east coast. When all was said and done, it was determined that is was the most costliest storm to date. When it came time for congress to debate the amount of Sandy FEMA money, there were two Republican Senators that spoke up the loudest regarding the enormous amount of FEMA money requested. The two senators are Jim Inhofe and Tom Coburn. But let's look at 2011 first. That's when both senators voted against legislation that would have granted necessary funding for FEMA, when the agency was set to run our of money. Coburn even said that sending money to FEMA would have been "unconscionable".

Then Sandy hit and these two Senators both backed a plan to slash disaster relief to victims of Sandy. Sandy relief through FEMA was held up for months and was only approved in increments, instead of the usual lump sum payment. These two Senators as well as others, wanted a reduction in federal spending before any monies were released. This may sound good, but the reality is that it is not practical to reduce federal spending every time a disaster occurs in the U.S.

In the last two weeks, Oklahoma has been hit with multiple tornadoes that have devastated areas, including wiping out whole towns off the map. I can't imagine what it is like to be in a EF5 tornado with wind speeds of 200+ mph. I feel for their loss, as do all Americans. But, now that Oklahoma Senators Inhofe and Coburn own state has been devastated, again, they want FEMA money ASAP! What? It was OK for them to hold up money for Sandy victims, but when it comes to their own state, they have done a complete about face and want their money now, not months down the road. So they have flip flopped to help their own state but not others?

FYI, Oklahoma ranks third in the nation after Texas and California in terms of total federal disaster and fire declaration which kick starts the federal emergency relief funding process. But when it comes to their own state, both of their beliefs did a 180 degree change and want immediate help without delay. Maybe they should have thought about that when Sandy victims waited needlessly for their share of FEMA money due to politics.

It makes no common sense to flip flop when it suits you. Common sense tells me that there should be a federal tornado insurance program like the federal flood insurance program. This is especially important for states that continually get socked by frequent tornadoes. Money isn't free and maybe houses will be built better if owners had to pay an insurance premium for rebuilding. Maybe people in tornado alley should also consider building safe rooms, for their homes and businesses when they are rebuilt.

Til next week.

Peter

Driving Without CS

Hi Everyone,

Today's blog topic changed from my original idea, to real life events that occurred yesterday. So there we were yesterday, my wife and I, doing overdue Saturday errands. My wife drove for the first part of our errands and I drove the second part. But what is unique is what happened to the both of us while driving.

So at about the fourth mile from our home, we noticed that the car in front of us wasn't using their directionals to indicate that they were turning left at a traffic light. We were also turning left, so their non use of their directional was meaningless to us. Then as we traveled further along, we began to notice that more and more drivers were not using their directionals, when they were in fact turning. The first part of our trip was a 15 to 20 minute ride. During that time, we saw approximately 7 or 8 drivers not using their directionals. 

After our first errand was completed, I then drove. We did not even get out of the parking lot, where the second car we met, at the parking lot intersection, didn't use their signal to indicate they were turning left and cut me off. I couldn't believe that our streak, if you want to call it that, was continuing. Then not even a 1/4 mile away, at the very next T intersection, there was a big black SUV, with Connecticut plates, no turn signals on, in the left lane, to turn left, or so you would think. But no..... the driver decided that they really wanted to turn right, but from the left lane. The driver turned on his right directional and immediately turned right, cutting right in front of us. Believe it or not, at the very next traffic light, the car in front of us didn't use their signal to turn left. And when I looked into my rear view mirror I watched the stopped black SUV change lanes from the middle lane into my lane without using his directional.

So what is up what with drivers today? I was unable to see whether the drivers were young or old or male or female. But how can  people be so self centered or so oblivious to their surroundings or just so stupid? I don't know the answer to that one. What is obvious to me is that all the drivers had two things in common. The first being that they had failed to use common courtesy by following the law on using signals when turning and the second being that they had no common sense, at least while driving. Whatever their reasons for their not using directionals is inexcusable, but if they had one ounce of common sense they would have used their directionals as second nature. Failure to adhere to the most basic of traffic laws can end up in an accident.

All drivers need to use common sense when driving. Period, end of story.

Til next week.

Peter

Why Use Common Sense?

Hi Everyone,

So it has finally been finalized, without the need of or obvious use of any common sense. The outcome is basically what I had expected. What I am talking about? The new Tappan Zee bridge that will cross the Hudson river between Tarrytown, New York and Nyack, New York. The Tappan Zee bridge is the only bridge between the George Washington bridge to the south and the Bear Mountain bridge to the north.

The back story goes like this: the Tappan Zee bridge was opened in 1955 as a six lane bridge. For whatever reason, probably the cost, the bridge was built as a temporary one with a life expectancy of 50 years. These past 57 years have not been easy for this bridge. Besides the fact that it requires huge expenditures of money to keep it "safe", the question became why pour good money after bad if it had reached its life span?

Evidence of the bridge not being able to handle the huge influx in the amount of traffic that crosses it daily began about 27+ years ago. Of course there were the usual traffic jams, almost always on the side of rush hour. The median barrier was eventually removed and a moveable center barrier was installed to turn the six lane bridge into a seven lane bridge. The moveable barrier was moved twice a day to increase the rush hour side to four lanes. That solution didn't last long since the traffice jams continued to occur. Even adding E-Z pass about 15 years ago didn't help move traffic along much quicker.

Talk of replacing the bridge has been happening for about 20 or so years. You would think in all that time, that the powers to be would have been able to use some common sense in the design and use of a new bridge. First of all and the best solution, in my opinion, was a tunnel, that also had a light rail line. That idea was tossed due to cost and how and where to have the tunnel see the light of day at each end. The second solution was a single span bridge that had a light rail and/or bus transit system running down the middle of the bridge. Again that idea was tossed due to cost. So the final idea that was approved for $3.9 billion and is now in the process of having the pilings pounded into the river bottom, is a twin span bridge with no new mass transit option what so ever. Additionally, the new bridge will have a whopping total of eight lanes of traffic. Which doesn't even add an extra lane during rush hour. The final design is so short sighted and lacks any common sense at all floors me, but doesn't surprise me. What I find utterly stupid and out of touch with reality is that they are building two spans which will be more expensive then one span. There will be no option for mass transit. If money was and is an issue, build a single span bridge with the center section space left void for a future mass transit system of some kind. The least that the powers to be could have done is left open the option for some kind mass transit that could be built in the future. But noooooooooooo, that is not going to happen, which makes zero sense on any level.

What is going to happen is this: on the very day the new bridge opens, it will already be outdated, since it will not be able to handle the amount of traffic. It will be no better than the current bridge at being able to handle traffic. What will then happen in another 5-10 years when even more traffic uses the bridge? Since there is no mass transit option, the answer to that question is more and longer traffic jams and delays. What a great way to show how not to use common sense.

On a side note, the actual design of the bridge, in my opinion, is blase and dull. But hey, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

Til next week.

Peter