Archive for Everything else
Oil spill who to blame
Posted by: | CommentsThe beaches in Alabama are as white as sugar, wide, and very beautiful. The chemical makeup of the sand on the beaches is quartz. To think of what is happening to the beaches makes us very sad and apprehensive. But what is happening to the sea turtles, our beloved pelicans that are so ugly but soar so gracefully, and all the seabirds really breaks our hearts.
Then there is the human element. From the agony of the loved ones who had family members who perished with the devastation on the oil rig to the oil rig workers, from the roughnecks to the roustabouts, from the members of the management team of BP who were inflicted with terrible injuries to the many small business owners who will never recover from the effects of this catastrophe, from the property owners who depend on the income from individual condominiums to make financial ends meet to many others, the list goes on and on. This accident will go down in history as the worst ecological and environmental episode ever!
The primary responsibility for all of this death and destruction falls in the lap of a good company from one of our staunchest allies, Great Britain. There are other companies that are complicit, if that is the right word, but BP is the primary company of responsibility. The other companies are Transoceanic Exploration, Halliburton and some smaller suppliers. The U.S. government has, and continues to show, disdain for the efforts and lack of urgency BP has exhibited. Based on the recognized magnitude of the problem, the financial implications for BP, and the public relations nightmare created by this cataclysmic occurrence, how can anyone think that BP is not doing everything in its power, with the best technology available, to bring this man made rupture in the Gulf’s subsurface to finalization?
It is true that deepwater oil exploration technology is suspect, as evidenced by today’s events. But the oil companies are drilling in areas of such incredible depths that technology is being created as they go. The oilrig that exploded was capped at 5,290 feet, and the drill was another 17,000 feet below that. But since so many of the areas where oil is abundant and easily recoverable in the United States have been eliminated from oil exploration that the only place left is the oceans surrounding our country. Other nations of the world are drilling in the Gulf, and foreign exploration will continue.
Many people have blamed the Obama administration for its meek response to the problem. Others have talked about the restrictive demand of the environmentalists as being a component of the problem, and all have talked about the overall intransigence of British Petroleum. The critics are all right in their thinking, and I don’t have enough space to discuss each charge. But one thing is clear from the governmental standpoint. Politics pervades our entire life. We can’t even escape it when we have a national catastrophic event such as this.
Obama has talked about “kicking ass,” and the politicians have already initiated a criminal investigation. There will be time for all this political posturing once the situation is under control, and it will be. Now is the time for all parties to focus on stopping this calamity and trying to kick the ass of the only party in this drama that can stop it is really stupid.
The millions upon millions of gallons of oil hemorrhaging into the Gulf of Mexico every day is a crude reminder of the many ways humans are fouling the planet. As forests are cleared, cities and suburbs paved and expanded, as the air and sea warm and become increasingly polluted with cancer-causing chemicals and garbage, and with species dropping like flies, the planet’s health is being challenged in ways that have not occurred in its entire 4.5-billion-year existence.
World Cup soccer could kill you
Posted by: | CommentsTake care when you’re watching the World Cup. It could be hazardous to your health – especially if you’re favourite team is facing a tough game or shoot out.
According to a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine watching a stressful soccer match more than doubles the risk of an acute cardiovascular event. And the study warns that in view of “this excess risk” men with known heart
The study examines the period from June 9 to July 9 2006 during the FIFA World Cup held in Germany and looks at cardiovascular events in patients in the greater Munich area. Heart attacks in 4,279 patients were assessed. And on the days of matches involving the German team, the study found the incidence of cardiac emergencies was 2.66 times than during the control period.
“Our results show a strong and significant increase in the incidence of cardiovascular events (including the acute coronary syndrome and symptomatic cardiac arrhythmia), in a defined sample of the German population, in association with matches involving the German team during the FIFA World Cup,” the study says.
“In contrast, the average daily number of cardiac emergencies during soccer matches involving foreign teams was well within the range of values obtained during the control period.”
In other words if it’s your team that’s in a tight spot during the World Cup you’re more likely to have a heart attack. “It is clear that watching an important soccer match, which can be associated with intense emotional stress, triggers the acute coronary syndrome and symptomatic cardiac arrhythmia.”
A British Medical Journal analysis also found there was a connection between watching the World Cup and heart attacks. The analysis found the risk of being admitted to a British hospital for acute myocardial infarction on June 30, 1998 – the day England lost to Argentina in a World Cup match that was decided by a penalty kick shoot out – was higher than other days. In fact 25 per cent higher than average for that day of the year. And it wasn’t just the day of the loss, but heart attacks continued for a couple more days. In total there were 55 more heart attacks than normal.
Missing Lesson From the Mine Tragedy
Posted by: | CommentsIn the wake of last week’s disaster at Massey Energy Company’s Upper Big Branch Mine in West Virginia, it’s become increasingly clear that CEO Don Blankenship has gamed the loophole-laden mine safety enforcement system. Despite a supposedly tougher federal law that passed in 2006 after the Sago, West Virginia, mine explosion killed a dozen miners, Massey and other companies have been able to use the law as a shield to avoid tougher enforcement measures by appealing safety citations – and overwhelming the weak Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) with a backlog of appeals.
Even though Massey has faced proposed fines nearing $2 million since 2005 and been cited over 1,300 times, it’s paid only a fraction – one-sixth – of the proposed fines. All told, according to the United Mine Workers of America, nearly 50 people have been killed at Massey mines in the last ten years. In March alone, it was cited over 50 times for violations, many directly related to ventilation violations that allowed the build-up of explosive methane gas that played a major role in the killing of the 29 miners. As The Washington Post observed in an editorial,
“‘It’s a profession that’s not without risks and danger, and the workers and their families know that,’ Mr. Obama said of the coal industry Friday. ‘But their government and their employers know that they owe it to these families to do everything possible to ensure their safety when they go to work each day.’ A good place to start would be to ensure that the regulations on the books are vigorously enforced.”
And, in a perverse way, political leaders and media outlets that morbidly romanticize the courage of rural mine workers for working in an industry known for its risks are also in some ways promoting the view that mine disasters are as unavoidable as natural disasters. As USA Today proclaimed in a recent headline: “In mine country, risks a ‘way of life.’” The feature article concluded by quoting former miner Randy Cox, who had observed that deep in a coalmine, “bad things can happen fast, without warning.” The article noted, “that it will take a long time for this area to mourn and heal, Cox said. “‘It’s all in God’s hands now.’”
In contrast, “what unions, particularly in dangerous profession like mining, mean is that they give workers protection and the leverage of a working group with management to vocalize and bring forward concerns about safety without fear of retribution,” said Kimberly Freeman Brown, executive director of American Rights at Work, a champion of the now-stalled Employee Free Choice Act. She added, “In the absence of a union, in hard economic times, workers feel more vulnerable about losing their jobs and less confident about expressing their concerns about safety.”
This is what the Employee Free Choice Act is all about. Where there’s not going to be intimidation, where there’s not going to be retribution against employees who just think about organizing in the workplace because they’d like to go down into a workplace where they’re not going to lose their lives. Where it will just increase the safety in their area. Is that asking too much? Is it all for the dollar bill in America? This is morally wrong. There is absolutely no difference between what these guys did in the front office at this Massey Energy Company than what these guys did down the street on Wall Street to folks who were ripped off. This is a matter of life and death. That’s what this is.
Some dating services just not that into you
Posted by: | CommentsIt’s bad enough when a potential suitor breaks your heart. Now, dating services are causing grief for consumers.
The Better Business Bureau said complaints in northern Illinois about matchmaking services have more than doubled to 137 in the last year, up from 66 for the previous 12-month period.
The BBB told of a 70-year-old McHenry woman who paid $1,695 for an 18-month period, and didn’t realize it was an extra $20 a month to be able to go online and see potential matches after the first six months.
Pickings were slim in the 65- to 75-year-old demographic, she said.
“Many of them want to go out with women 15 years younger,” she told the BBB. “I joined in June 2009 and have only met three people.”
Common complaints included few arranged dates, subpar prospects and poor service.
Matchmaking services often say they have a database of thousands of singles in the area and promise a minimum number of dates, the BBB said. But one consumer “reported to only have received three referrals over a 12-month period, significantly less than what was promised.”
Often consumers complained about being paired with people who didn’t match their criteria, including smokers or people who lived too far away.
Others were told by matchmaking companies to quit being so picky about whom they dated.
The BBB encourages consumers to check its Web site for complaints, to avoid high-pressure sales tactics and to realize that they might not stop being billed once the contract runs out.
branson complaint letter response
Posted by: | CommentsThis is a letter recently received by the Virgin Atlantic customer complaints team and is currently being hailed on news blogs, such as this one on The Telegraph as possibly the funniest customer complaint letter ever.
I love the Virgin brand, I really do which is why I continue to use it despite a series of unfortunate incidents over the last few years. This latest incident takes the biscuit.
Ironically, by the end of the flight I would have gladly paid over a thousand rupees for a single biscuit following the culinary journey of hell I was subjected to at the hands of your corporation.
I imagine the same questions are racing through your brilliant mind as were racing through mine on that fateful day. What is this? Why have I been given it? What have I done to deserve this? And, which one is the starter, which one is the desert?
You don’t get to a position like yours Richard with anything less than a generous sprinkling of observational power so I KNOW you will have spotted the tomato next to the two yellow shafts of sponge on the left. Yes, it’s next to the sponge shaft without the green paste. That’s got to be the clue hasn’t it. No sane person would serve a desert with a tomato would they. Well answer me this Richard, what sort of animal would serve a desert with peas in:
I know it looks like a baaji but it’s in custard Richard, custard. It must be the pudding. Well you’ll be fascinated to hear that it wasn’t custard. It was a sour gel with a clear oil on top. It’s only redeeming feature was that it managed to be so alien to my palette that it took away the taste of the curry emanating from our miscellaneous central cuboid of beige matter. Perhaps the meal on the left might be the desert after all.
Anyway, this is all irrelevant at the moment. I was raised strictly but neatly by my parents and if they knew I had started desert before the main course, a sponge shaft would be the least of my worries. So lets peel back the tin-foil on the main dish and see what’s on offer.
I’ll try and explain how this felt. Imagine being a twelve year old boy Richard. Now imagine it’s Christmas morning and you’re sat their with your final present to open. It’s a big one, and you know what it is. It’s that Goodmans stereo you picked out the catalogue and wrote to Santa about.
Now I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking it’s more of that Baaji custard. I admit I thought the same too, but no. It’s mustard Richard. MUSTARD. More mustard than any man could consume in a month. On the left we have a piece of broccoli and some peppers in a brown glue-like oil and on the right the chef had prepared some mashed potato. The potato masher had obviously broken and so it was decided the next best thing would be to pass the potatoes through the digestive tract of a bird.
Richard…. What is that white stuff? It looked like it was going to be yoghurt. It finally dawned on me what it was after staring at it. It was a mixture between the Baaji custard and the Mustard sauce. It reminded me of my first week at university. I had overheard that you could make a drink by mixing vodka and refreshers. I lied to my new friends and told them I’d done it loads of times. When I attempted to make the drink in a big bowl it formed a cheese Richard, a cheese. That cheese looked a lot like your baaji-mustard.
So that was that Richard. I didn’t eat a bloody thing. My only question is: How can you live like this? I can’t imagine what dinner round your house is like, it must be like something out of a nature documentary.
Can the Pope be charged as a criminal?
Posted by: | CommentsProtests are growing against Pope Benedict XVI’s planned trip this fall to Britain, where the legal world is debating whether the Vatican’s implicit statehood could shield the Pope from potential prosecution related to sex crimes by pedophile priests.
More than 10,000 people have signed an online petition to Prime Minister Gordon Brown opposing the Pope’s four-day visit to England and Scotland in September.
The campaign has gained momentum as more Catholic sex- abuse scandals shake Europe.
Although Benedict has not been accused of any crime, senior British lawyers are now examining whether the Pope should have immunity as a head of state and whether he could be prosecuted under the principle of universal jurisdiction for an alleged systematic cover-up of sexual abuses by priests.
The middle of last year, the Irish government’s commission investigating charges of abuse in Catholic institutions – keeping in mind that, for most of the last century, “Catholic institutions” meant not just the church on the corner, but most of the school system – concluded that there was “a substantial level of sexual abuse of boys in care that extended over a range from improper touching and fondling to rape with violence. Perpetrators of abuse were able to operate undetected for long periods at the core of institutions. Cases of sexual abuse were managed with a view to minimising the risk of public disclosure and consequent damage to the institution and the Congregation. This policy resulted in the protection of the perpetrator. When lay people were discovered to have sexually abused, they were generally reported to the Gardai [the police]. When a member of a Congregation was found to be abusing, it was dealt with internally and was not reported to the Gardaí.
“The desire to protect the reputation of the Congregation and institution was paramount. The documents revealed that sexual abusers were often long-term offenders who repeatedly abused children wherever they were working. Contrary to the Congregations’ claims that the recidivist nature of sexual offending was not understood, it is clear from the documented cases that they were aware of the propensity for abusers to re-abuse. The risk, however, was seen by the Congregations in terms of the potential for scandal and bad publicity should the abuse be disclosed. The danger to children was not taken into account. When confronted with evidence of sexual abuse, the response of the religious authorities was to transfer the offender to another location where, in many instances, he was free to abuse again.”
What he’s referring to is the pope’s previous job: For more than 20 years before he became the pope, Cardinal Ratzinger led the Vatican office that had responsibility, among other issues, for response to child abuse cases. An archbishop wrote letters to that office in 1996, calling for disciplinary proceedings against priest Lawrence Murphy. This has been confirmed by Church and Vatican documents. Murphy is believed to have molested some 200 boys at St John’s School for the Deaf in St Francis, Wisconsin, between 1950 and 1974. While a canonical trial was initiated by Cardinal Ratzinger’s secretary, it was ended by the future pope himself after his receipt of a letter from Murphy in which Murphy said he was ill and wanted to live out the remainder of his time in the “dignity of my priesthood”.
India launch cow urine soft drink
Posted by: | CommentsDoes your Pepsi lack pep? Is your Coke not the real thing? India’s Hindu nationalist movement apparently has the answer: a new soft drink made from cow urine.
The bovine brew is in the final stages of development by the Cow Protection Department of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), India’s biggest and oldest Hindu nationalist group, according to the man who makes it.
Om Prakash, the head of the department, said the drink – called “gau jal”, or “cow water” – in Sanskrit was undergoing laboratory tests and would be launched “very soon, maybe by the end of this year”.
“Don’t worry, it won’t smell like urine and will be tasty too,” he told The Times from his headquarters in Hardwar, one of four holy cities on the River Ganges. “Its USP will be that it’s going to be very healthy. It won’t be like carbonated drinks and would be devoid of any toxins.”
Hindus revere cows and slaughtering them is illegal in most of India. Cow dung is traditionally used as a fuel and disinfectant in villages, while cow urine and dung are often consumed in rituals to “purify” those on the bottom rungs of the Hindu caste system.
In 2001, the RSS and its offshoots – which include the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party – began promoting cow urine as a cure for ailments ranging from liver disease to obesity and even cancer.
Mr Prakash said his drink, by contrast, was made mainly of cow urine, mixed with a few medicinal and ayurvedic herbs. He said it would be “cheap”, but declined to give further details about its price or ingredients until it was officially launched.
He insisted, however, that it would be able to compete with the American cola brands, even with their enormous advertising budgets. “We’re going to give them good competition as our drink is good for mankind,” he said. “We may also think of exporting it.”
Mortgage refinancing penalties prompt backlash
Posted by: | CommentsLow interest rates may have made mortgages cheaper. They have also made Douglas Melville a much busier man.
His office, which handles complaints from consumers about their banks, has seen a spike in the number of new cases it is investigating. In the quarter that ended Jan. 31, the Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments, or OBSI, opened 301 new files – nearly twice the number in the same quarter last year and almost three times as many as in 2008.
Part of the reason for the increase: More consumers are looking into breaking their mortgages to refinance at lower rates – only to discover that doing so often triggers a prepayment penalty of thousands of dollars.
One frequent complaint is that the method of calculating the penalties is confusing. Last year, as interest rates were falling to all-time lows, Michael Davie looked into breaking the mortgage contract on his two-bedroom Ottawa condominium. The 27-year-old engineer, a first-time homeowner, was just two years into a five-year, fixed-rate mortgage of 4.479 per cent, but he suspected that refinancing might be worth it. /p>
“I decided to have a look at it but I had the same problem as everyone else – I couldn’t figure out how the penalty was calculated,” he said.
He searched his mortgage documents and failed to find it spelled out anywhere. A quick call to the mortgage company revealed that his penalty was the so-called interest rate differential, or IRD. Mr. Davie was charged a $2,500 penalty for breaking his mortgage and refinancing at a lower variable rate, saving himself roughly $300 a month in interest payments.
On a variable-rate mortgage, a penalty of three months’ interest is usually charged for prepayment. For fixed mortgages, the penalty could be three months or the IRD, which is more difficult to calculate. The IRD is based on the difference between the existing mortgage rate and the one at which the customer would be renewing.
Sometimes lenders calculate it using the posted mortgage rate – increasing the size of the penalty – rather than using the lower, discounted rate that many customers actually pay.
Over the years, most people had grown accustomed to the fees being three months interest, Mr. Melville said. “It just happens that in this unique interest rate environment, that was not the case. It was the three months’ interest or the IRD, and right now the IRDs are a lot bigger than the three months’ interest.”