.jpg)
Cartoon from Get Liberty.org:
ALG Editor’s Note: The following featured cartoon by William Warren was done especially for the people of Honduras rallying for freedom, and as that battle enters its crucial stage over the next several days, the staff at ALG News hopes it will serve as inspiration for Hondurans, but also put into perspective what is really happening there.
Several years ago, when the Mini Cooper came out with a convertible, I tried to buy a new Orange Mini S convertible with a black top in honor of the Oregon State Beavers. For some reason my brother-in-law, who’s in the car business, wasn’t able to work with Rasmussen.
I ended up trading my Miata in on a 1999 Saab convertible 9-3. I still want a Mini. I am assuming this “Cash For Clunkers” will work for me. I would guess a 2009 or 2010 Mini would get 10 miles better gas milage than my 10 year old Saab and I would get a $4,500 voucher. Only question I have is this: Does the voucher apply toward taxes or toward the purchase price of the car?
The idea is that people can get a voucher of up to $4,500 if they trade in their gas hogs for newer, more energy-efficient models. The way it works is that a person receives a $3,500 voucher if the new vehicle gets at least four more miles to the gallon than the old one, and a $4,500 voucher if it gets at least 10 more miles per gallon.
Sweet!
UPDATE: I have just discovered a serious flaw in my plan. I went to the GM site to calculate my voucher and lo and behold, Saab is not listed instead I get this popup:
Why isn’t my current vehicle listed?
If you don’t see your trade-in vehicle on the list, it does not meet CARS eligibility criteria. To be eligible for CARS, the vehicle you are trading in must 1) have been manufactured less than 25 years before the date you trade it in; 2) have a “new” combined city/highway fuel economy of 18 MPG or less. Though your vehicle is not eligible for the CARS Program, GM still has great offers on our outstanding new GM vehicles. For other trade-in requirements, go to the Program Details tab.
Ironically, GM owns Saab or at least it did when I posted this.
Here’s a follow-up to my post that the House passed the (gasp) Global Warming bill 219 to 212 in which I lampooned the NYT announcement of its passage:
A vote of 219 (stupid people who view [gasp] global warming as a religion) narrowly defeated the 212 house members (that pay attention to over 37,000 scientists and one EPA veteran who’s been censored by his employer for his report that doesn’t buy into the hysteria).
Now, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) today is demanding that the Environmental Protection Agency allow public comment on an internal global warming report that the agency itself suppressed.
CEI is submitting the report to the EPA and formally requesting that EPA re-open the comment period on its so-called “endangerment proceeding,” so the public can comment on both the report and on EPA’s conduct. EPA’s official comment period ended June 23.
Today’s actions follow CEI’s release of internal EPA emails a week ago that demonstrated the agency cover-up, followed by a draft version of the report released last Thursday. A day later, the author of the report was given permission by the agency to release the final report but only on his own website.
“EPA sits on this report for over three months, and then only allows it to be made public on the author’s personal website,” said CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman. “The fact that we have to formally re-file it with the agency indicates how unreal this situation is.”
You can read a pdf of the report written by Alan Carlin and it is devastating to the religion of (gasp) global warming believers.
Take a look at Figure 1.2 on page 34 of the filing: Figure 1-2: IPCC AR4 Figure 26 Updated
Figure 1-2 shows how climate models and reality diverge. The red, purple, and orange lines are model forecasts of global temperatures under different emission scenarios. The yellow line shows how much warming we are supposedly “committed to” even if CO2 concentrations don’t change according to the IPCC. The blue and green lines are actual temperatures as measured by ground-based (HadCrut) and satellite (UAH LT) monitoring systems. It is fairly evident that the IPCC projections are quite divergent from the actual experience in recent years.
What’s really rather remarkable, is that since 2000, the rates at which CO2 emissions and concentrations are increasing have accelerated. According to Canadell et al. (2008), fossil fuel and cement emissions increased by 3.3 percent per year during 2000-2006, compared to 1.3 percent per year in the 1990s. Similarly, atmospheric CO2 concentrations increased by 1.93 parts per million per year during 2000-2006, compared to 1.58 ppm in the 1990s. And yet, despite accelerating emission rates and concentrations, there’s been no net warming in the 21st century, and more accurately, a decline.
Bottom line: you have all these wild projections of (gasp) global warming and a huge increase in C02, yet there’s been no global warming. Instead we have a decline in temperatures (See those charts on page 33 of the filing).
Read the report for yourself and then know you’ve been had!
A little over six weeks ago Adam Hewison produced a video on the relationship between Apple and RIMM.
He called it the “Battle Of The Tech Titans,” and in that short video he explained that he felt the relationship was changing between Apple, Inc. (NASDAQ_AAPL) and Research In Motion, Ldt (NASDAQ_RIMM). He detailed a strategy of approaching this market using a trading strategy that he calls “pair trading” or “trading pairs.”
What trading pairs means is that you buy one market while going short the other market in the same sector. Now Apple and RIMM are battling it out right now in the smart phone sector. It remains to be seen who is going to be triumphant in this battle but it would appear as though Apple may have the upper hand based on its very successful “APP” store.
I strongly suggests you watch his earlier video on this subject; and then watch his latest video which he just produced.
Trading pairs is what many professionals do when they are unsure as to the direction of the general market but feel pretty comfortable in their analysis of the relationship between two stocks. I hope you find the video both informative and educational.
The video is free to watch and there is no need to register. I would love to get your feedback about this video on our blog.
When you voted for “The One” did you really believe him when he pledged not to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000? Boy were you suckered!
I just finished William R. Forstchen’s “One Second After” and it is an eye opener. Like “Into the Forest” or “Gift Upon the Shore”, it paints a picture of the U.S. after a disaster strips away the thin veneer we call civilization over the whole of America. “Into the Forest” is written mostly from an individual perspective about coping with the loss of civilization and “Gift Upon the Shore” from a small group’s ability to cope with disaster. “One Second After” is about a small town just outside of Ashville, North Carolina and how it deals with the aftermath of an Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) attack on the U.S.
An EMP is generated by the exploding of a nuclear weapon 250 to 300 miles over the U.S. The electric pulse that is generated fries the computer innards that run our society. The electronics in our modern cars is fried, our financial system, that is primarily electronic, is fried along with anything in the way of energy production, food production, and hospital care. We suddenly living in a country as it was 400 to 500 years ago.
Forstchen writes a page turner that pulls at your heart. His city must confront ways to handle the sick and their medical needs. It must confront lawlessness and summary justice, food shortages with no help from the outside. In fact with all communications cut off, thwere isnooutside any longer.
In an EMP attack we may lose 10% of our population in the first week. Just imagine the plight of commercial aircraft. On an average day there are 3,000 planes flying over the U.S. and an average of 200 people on each plane. With no way to steer, six hundred thousand people would be lost in an instant as the planes fall from the sky.
Forstchen thinks that in the farm belt we could lose up to 60% of the citizens. In the big cities after a year only 10% would be left.
In 2004, a reprt was issued called the Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack. The report is 62 pages long and outlines the threat we face and seems to focus on stopping an attack rather than hardening our electronics to withstand such an attack. It is dry reading. I recommend “One Second After” and when you are done, I ask you to contact Congress about protecting the nation.
Or you can start accumulating arms and ammo to protect yourself and to forage for food. You can start setting up a food larder. You can acquire knowledge to make your self useful in the new society, like how to generate electricity, steam engine technology, animal husbandry and horticulture.
Stumble It!
