Should I be Concerned About Global Warming?

Should I be worried about global warming?

According to this video the cost of doing nothing will surely outweigh the cost of doing something about global warming. Well my question is when was the earth ever sustainable?  Was there ever a period when people where  living in harmony with the earth? What would the total population look like? Well, the answer to these questions might be scarier than the video presented. 

In the mind of SamCWrites
Well before I get into answering some of these questions let me tell you how I stumbled into thinking about this. Well I have an interest in business and a few weeks ago I noticed that the price of oil has been extremely low. What used to cost my wife $40 to fill her gas tank had started costing $24. Talk about a heck of a savings. So I then started watching the news to understand what was going on. I heard speculators talking about how there was an over production and how OPEC countries were not going to lower production amounts. My favorite economic doomsday scenario builder right now is Peter Schiff.

So next I run into another blog talking about Peak Oil by Gail Tverberg called Our Finite World In an article called Ten Reasons Why a Severe Drop in Oil Prices is a Problem. 

There are really two different problems that a person can be concerned about:

1. Peak oil: the possibility that oil prices will rise, and because of this production will fall in a rounded curve. Substitutes that are possible because of high prices will perhaps take over.
2. Debt related collapse: oil limits will play out in a very different way than most have imagined, through lower oil prices as limits to growth in debt are reached, and thus a collapse in oil “demand” (really affordability). The collapse in production, when it comes, will be sharper and will affect the entire economy, not just oil.

In the commentary section people began asking the question of how can we use these resources more suitably the basic answers given by Gail were

Densifying cities would require more energy–moving people farther away from where the food is grown, and making people more dependent on electricity and other forms of energy. If the issue is keeping the current system from collapsing, I agree that using more energy is (very temporarily) the answer.

The problem is that the current system seems likely to collapse, in the very near term. If it does, it will not support dense populations in large cities very well. Adding more density just makes the problem worse after collapse.

 (Back to the issue at Hand)

When I asked my classmates and friends when they thought the world was consuming things in a sustainable era  they pointed at the Native Americans and specifically around the year 1700s.
The prevailing guess was that at that point in time there were only about 1.2 Billion people on earth.
Right now the population is at about 7 Billion + people. That means in order for the humans to become aligned with earth 5.8 Billion People have to go. I'm no mathematician so I'm guessing that means that 1 out of 8 people gets to live and everyone else has to die. So with older growth estimates that would only delay the impending doom for another 200 years before the earth would find itself in the same predicament.

Type in World Sustainable Populations Estimates into Google and you will see something similar.

So if we are talking about changing things in the United States to cut carbon emissions by 25% then compared to cutting 7/8 of the population I would assume we would yield an extra month of earth time.

I hope if you view the situation as bad as I'm outlining in this blog then when you see these efforts to curb emissions you would see that this no more than plugging a dam with your fingers in hopes of saving the village.  So now I would argue that perhaps instead of looking to stop the environment from crashing be thankful for another day cause the alternative is gonna cost you.

Report the Decline of Small Business Hurt Economic Recovery Job Growth

Reports from MSN Money are

The Labor Department announced that applications for unemployment last week fell to 283,000. This data – which reveals ups and downs in layoffs – was, of course, characterized in the news as a sign of an improving job market. But there’s a big difference between fewer layoffs (good news, but not awesome news) and more new jobs (an increased employment rate). And we have a lot of people who need jobs, with what some refer to as the “real unemployment rate” (the Labor Department’s underemployment rate)at over 11 percent. Imagine the economy as a bucket of water – in this case, the water is jobs – with a hole in it. The hole just got a little smaller, according to the unemployment applications data, but the level of the water still isn’t increasing the way it should.

 When I think of the small business sector that is suffering I think of all of the legislation that raises the cost of entry into the market. Especially in a time when the economy is recovering I wonder why these guys are quick to snap on initiatives on energy. Since we have moved away from a manufacturing society the only thing that I can think of that we have been doing well is producing energy.

Is there value in becoming an independant contractor?

I ran across an article from the Huffington Post outlining Why We're All Becoming Independent Contractors.  The author Robert Reich says

The rise of "independent contractors" is the most significant legal trend in the American workforce -- contributing directly to low pay, irregular hours, and job insecurity.

It's become a race to the bottom. Once one business cuts costs by making its workers "independent contractors," every other business in that industry has to do the same -- or face shrinking profits and a dwindling share of the market

I suggest this one: Any corporation that accounts for at least 80 percent or more of the pay someone gets, or receives from that worker at least 20 percent of his or her earnings, should be presumed to be that person's "employer."

My personal belief is that having the majority of labor through contractors has been happening for quite some time. I believe things are changing form quite a bit. What I  mean is this for some time companies would hire employees to work for them, pay benefits, and then  there came a period where companies would use staffing agencies to keep some of their seasonal workers, then you have companies as mentioned in the article that strictly independent. This is what I have seen first hand from my experience working.

From an employer perspective, If I didn't have to pay benefits then I wouldn't these are extra costs that can be a bit burdensome especially if I am the small to midsize company. I'm sure a long philosophical debate could be derived from this situation on what is fair and what is not fair.  Where does one draw the line in the sand on who should be allowed benefits. What I do know is that where there is an artificial price floor put in then there will be an oversupply. In this case that means an oversupply of labor and lower marginal price paid in wages. Again this is highly debatable to some. But I wonder the cost of implementing such agency law and enforcement might be to the tax payers as well as what are the implications of such a law on the labor market?  Does this mean that we will have a middle class to rival the time period of the 1950's and 1960's? Does this mean that these agency laws provide minimal change as in after all the money is spent the average person sees their wages in all reality go up on par with inflation?

What does this mean to me on the bottom of the ladder. I think that regardless of what happens with the agency law either one has to develop a set of  specific set of specialty skills or facilitate the evolution of these contracts. One of the things I believe are that the 9-5 is going the way of the dinosaur.

What's Happening

I started a new job in September 2014 since then my days at work have been filled with training and more training. Since completing my graduate program I have been making even less money, so after work I have been filling out application after application. Healthcare Administration jobs and other jobs.  My target job would be to be in the role of a business analyst or project improvement. Since coming into working age I enjoy making things work better. I have spent hours and hours reading and eyeballing new ways to get in front of prospective employers and I came across an article by Jullien Gordon Letter To An MBA which struck a chord with me.

MBAs should focus on creating value.
MBA programs, even online MBA programs, focus more on capturing value (business models) than creating value. Whereas leadership is the process of taking smart risk and creating value, management is the process of sucking risks out of a business and capturing value. Keep in mind that entrepreneurs don’t love risk—they actually hate risk. True entrepreneurs are just willing to take the risk necessary to achieve a larger purpose. The Masters in Business Administration (MBA) should be changed to an Masters in Business Leadership (MBL) or Masters in Value Creation (MVC). This would change the focus of the curriculum, students, and programming. Though most people go to business school to change careers, it has the power to change the world.

I've been spending my evenings essentially looking for a way to create value. I've been thinking of all the ways I can create and sell. In the process my wife has had a life long dream to write. She is currently working on her second book release. Her first book can be purchased here. (Shameless plug!) In the process of going to events she needed a new of way selling her product and since dealing entirely in cash can be cumbersome she got a Square account and she was able to sell at her events with just her Iphone and a good phone charger. As I am reading the article by Mr. Gordon I ran across this.

MBAs can create value by saving others time.
You can’t really save time as in store it, but if you can help people “save” time by getting them to where they want to go faster, safer, and easier, you can create extreme value for others and capture some of that value in the form of money. The reason a personal trainer is able to make a living doing what they love is because they can help someone move from 300 lbs. (point A) to 250 lbs. (Point B) faster than the person could have done it on their own. The reason the iPhone is doing so well is because it helps people navigate their music, the internet, contacts, and other data faster and easier than the individual could do it on their own. It’s pretty simple. I call this your professional velocity. Your professional velocity is your ability to close the distance between point A and B for other people and organizations. The higher your professional velocity, the more value you will create and capture.

All of a sudden a light went off in my head. I do have something to offer the world outside the traditional sense of work! I can write resume's heck I have literally applied to thousands of jobs. I have built dozens of websites. Not only can I do these thing I can do them competently and in a short amount of time. I can't remember where I read that to be an entrepreneur it doesn't mean you have necessarily have the best product it just means you have a good product to sell. Wouldn't you know it a few days later I built my own website for resume's  and not only have I built a resume I found a way to capture dollars by performing services. In addition I can help people who are on the path to entrepreneurship by offering advice while doing business plans.  I hope to be on the list of capturing 25 cents per minute and then pushing the limits as far as I can. My website can be found here http://samcwrites.wix.com/samcalvinconsulting

Thanks,


SamCWrites

Subsidizing Higher Education

Some of my work colleagues and I were discussing higher education and the cost of getting a degree.

I like to view what Milton Friedman has to say about the subject.  The question Dr. Friedman puts forth is “Whether or not Higher Education Subsidies are justifiable activities of the government?”   The argument that Dr. Friedman puts forth is that by having a federal government subsidize education you are taking the taxes of lower income people and then using those funds to benefit the people that are typically of higher income families.

 

 

According to Pew Social and Demographic Trends in 2012 estimated that 31% of American adults ages 25 and older have bachelors degrees compared to 1971 where only 12% of adults had attained a bachelors degree. 

According to the Pew Research of Social and Demographic trends  the biggest increase in borrowing has been among more affluent student.

 

Here is a quick look at the numbers of where I went to school.  As an African American male in 2012 there were about 558 AA male Students enrolled in the spring session.  There were  917  AA women enrolled at the University of Central Oklahoma.  The Total Student Population was 15,832.  Within the same year the graduation rate in 4yrs would have been 12% 6 years 36% and 41% in 8 years.

	AA enrollees and graduates in 2012 UCO
Enrollees		4yrs grad	6 yrs grad	8 yrs grad
558	males	67	201	229
917	females	110	330	376
1475	totals	177	531	605

According to the American Counsel of  Education found that in 2007 – 2008 the individuals who earned their baccalaureate degrees in 2007- 2008  were not nearly as racially diverse as the overall undergraduate student body. The graduates were largely unmarried, childless, white young adults in their early 20’s who were financially dependent on their parents and who seamlessly moved along paths toward degree attainment.

What I find interesting is that in the height of political talks there are people that are claiming that the GOP are doing damage to the country and are failing in the case of where I am from I see outcry against Mary Fallin.  She proposes cutting 25% of the state income tax as a result would reduce the education funding. I wonder why? Why is it that if she reduces the expenditures towards education she is failing the state as some of my peers would say? My question is what can be done to increase the number of AA University graduates. Continuing to push for more funding is just going to inflate the cost of education. 

 

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts. See leadership and staff.

Ebola a few weeks later

Last week there was the issue of Ebola spreading through the Dallas area. I can remember going to lunch in my non hospital environment co-workers were wanting to put on masks to deal with customers out of fear of getting ebola. I would turn on the radio and hear people discussing how President Obama was not on the job for not closing down airports and sending a CDC SWAT team to Dallas.  In the aftermath it seems easier to look at the situation and say what we should have done to make the situation better.

I have been trying to understand how things have come the way they are. I do know that with the advent of technology such as the EMR or electronic health record was supposed to help with preventing a patient as such to have gone through the process that occurred. The patient claimed to go to the hospital after being in the country facing a viral outbreak. Instead of being admitted to the hospital, the patient was turned away with the possibility of  infecting others as well as eventually dying.

The problem is that this infection is very similar to having the flu. The emergency room staff are not always able to discern the effects of foreign illnesses from standard illnesses. Finally after three days the patient is admitted to the hospital.  

The thing that I don't understand is how the CDC was not able to enact any type of security measures to prevent  further spread of the illness. A few weeks ago I found some of the CDC guidelines about dealing with the virus in Africa. The thing was the manual was about 200 pages which half devoted to the appropriate wear and removal of the PPE.

The line from the Executive office is that they do not want to close the borders due to destabilizing emerging countries.

"Everything will be okay... we have the best health system in place"

I can understand why the guy wasn't diagnosed at the beginning 

Why weren't the people that had primary contact with the Ebola patient quarantined?

Days later after patient zero had been admitted to the hospital two nurses involved in patient care tested positive for the Ebola virus. 

As usual the government has been slow to react. I find this troubling considering that the virus is not quite as contagious as some and didn't end up in a city that is densely populated.
 

Protocols for containment of Ebola

Monday Moring Quarterbacking

It is very easy to look at a situation after things happen and place blame. That is not my intent of understanding what is going on.  I do believe in looking at things from a rather simplistic point of view. Ebola virus disease (EVD) according to the World Health Organization is formerly known as Ebola Hemorrhagic fever.

·         The Virus is transmitted to people from wild animals and spreads in the human population in human to human transmission.

·         The average EVD case fatality is around 50%  Case Fatality rates have varied from 25% to 90% in past outbreaks.

·         There are currently no licensed Ebola vaccines but two(2) potential candidates are undergoing evaluation.

Ebola gets its name from a 1976 outbreak in a village near the Ebola River in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

According to the WHO the Ebola virus is difficult to distinguish from other infectious diseases such as  malaria, typhoid fever and meningitis.  

While I was driving the children this morning I heard Peter Brock radio talk host say that the CDC has issued a statement regarding about the new infection of a nurse.  According to the CDC “There was a break in protocol.”   According to Fox News there are trainings and standards that must be adhered to.  Well According to the CDC there is a document that explains how to control those virus infections.

Infection Control for Viral Haemorrhagic Fevers In the African Health Care Setting. Developed and written by Ethleen Llyod M.S. Helen Perry, M.A. Liliien Yang, M.S. written in 1998.

So now my question is which procedures were broken and did the Nurse test positive for the virus? Was the hospital following the CDC/WHO guidelines?