Stop whining, America!

john smith wrote:

In my newspaper this morning, the water cooler company that had been in
business for 80 years is closing its doors.
EBCO/Oasis has had its products and patents copied by the Chinese and
undersold to the point that they have been driven out of business.

Don't those things run on tap water, anybody have water good enough to
still use those?

Jay Honeck wrote:
Everywhere, every day on the radio, television, and in the newspapers, all I
hear is how the "Record Price of Oil" is killing America.

Yet, strangely, Americans keep driving *more*. And I don't see anyone
flying less.

How can this be?

Here are some encouraging stats from the current issue of Newsweek:

Limbecile jibberish at its best!


- Oil, at $66 per barrel, has set a "nominal" record for high price.
However, in real, adjusted-for-inflation dollars, oil would have to top
$86.72 per barrel to beat the price record set in 1981.

BFD, in 2001 it was $10/barrel and LA Ca. Arco price was 89 CENTS/Ga.


- For a gallon of gas to set a record, it would have to cost $3.12 per
gallon, which was set back in 1981.

- Or, for that matter, it would have to cost $2.67 per gallon, which is what
it cost way back in 1935.

- Since the first "Energy Crisis" in the 1970s, our economy has become MUCH
more energy efficient. Total energy consumption per dollar of GDP has been
cut almost in half since 1973.

- Since 1980, the percentage of consumer spending that goes for energy has
*declined* from 9 to 6 percent, despite "record" prices.

NO EXCUSE FOR A 50 PERCENT INCREASE IN 6 MONTHS!


- At the current rate of growth, our economy will DOUBLE in size in 18
years. (This is why, BTW, that even after President Bush's tax cuts,
federal revenues are still 17.5& of GDP -- just one percentage point below
the post-World War II norm.)

Sky Dreaming at its best, the Iowa Meth harvest must have started.


- Over the last 40 years, increases in productivity have averaged 2.1% per
year. Since 2001, it's averaged 3.9%.

- Even though rising productivity means that the economy can grow without
adding jobs, we have added over 4 million new jobs since July 2003.

After LOSING how many since 2000 ??????? What kind of new jobs are
these, bartenders?
The liberal BANKRUPTCY laws expire in Oct. file early on the Inn,
Jayster.


JG

A lot of Americans have an uneasy sense that we're running on fumes.

It's kind of funny that we come to the same conclusion for entirely
different reasons.

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

and saving energy is also an economic argument: you aren't that dependent
on energy.

Not! Our largest expense every month is for electricity and gas.
During our recent heat wave, I paid over $4000 to air condition our
three 3-story buildings -- for the single month of July.

It's usually around $3K per month. And that has gone up 30% since we
bought the place in 2002. (And we have NOT raised rates since we
opened.)


if you have to spent less on heating/cooling at your hotel
because of a new insulation, then you won't have many problems on keeping
your rates constant. But you will have to increase your room rates when
your costs for heating/cooling rises 20 or 30%.

Sadly, the energy companies have seen fit to continually raise rates,
even before the recent run-up of oil prices, and we (as a nation)
continue to ignore the relatively cheap energy alternatives.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Don't those things run on tap water, anybody have water good enough to
still use those?

When we moved here, tap water in Iowa City was drawn from the river,
and was nearly undrinkable.

Now, after spending $18 million and 5 years digging deep wells, it is
marvelous.

Of course, I'm now paying TRIPLE what I paid for water in Racine, WI
(which had the best, award-winning tap water in the country) -- but,
hey, at least we don't have to waste money on bottled water.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 27 Aug 2005 11:03:59 -0700, Jay Honeck wrote:

and saving energy is also an economic argument: you aren't that dependent
on energy.

Not! Our largest expense every month is for electricity and gas.

I meant: after saving energy (with using better insulation, for example),
THEN you aren't that dependent on energy any longer.

During our recent heat wave, I paid over $4000 to air condition our
three 3-story buildings -- for the single month of July.

hmm. don't you think it's time to insulate the building and look for
windows that are state of the art - technology-wise?

It's usually around $3K per month. And that has gone up 30% since we
bought the place in 2002. (And we have NOT raised rates since we
opened.)

so you are eating all the losses (inflation not calculated)


if you have to spent less on heating/cooling at your hotel
because of a new insulation, then you won't have many problems on keeping
your rates constant. But you will have to increase your room rates when
your costs for heating/cooling rises 20 or 30%.

Sadly, the energy companies have seen fit to continually raise rates,
even before the recent run-up of oil prices, and we (as a nation)
continue to ignore the relatively cheap energy alternatives.

... but this is not really news, is it?

#m
--
The most likely way for the world to be destroyed,
most experts agree, is by accident. That's where we
come in; we're computer professionals. We cause accidents.
-- Nathaniel Borenstein

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:P0RPe.282907$x96.117848@attbi_s72...
Ocean waves are very far apart so even a 30 foot wave is no big deal,
great
lakes waves are very close together and very steep. Get down in the
trough
of an ocean wave and the water just rolls underneath you. Get in a
trough
of a good sized wave on the great lakes and you are looking at a near
verticle wall of water.

Remember the "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"? That was a giant (729
foot) lake freighter, which was either broken in two or driven under by
the waves of a Great Lakes November storm. See http://www.ssefo.com/
fore more info.

The Great Lakes are nothing like an inland lake. I've watched many
awesome storms (thankfully from shore) that generated waves of almost
unbelievable violence, frequency and intensity.

And the closest I've ever felt to death was on a small car ferry, crossing
"Death's Door" (the gap between Washington Island and Gill's Rock, at the
tip of the Door Peninsula in Lake Michigan) during an October storm. The
waves were awesome, and the skeletons of many, many wrecks litter the
bottom of Lake Michigan in that area.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.

Mike
MU-2

Mike Rapoport wrote:
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:P0RPe.282907$x96.117848@attbi_s72...

Ocean waves are very far apart so even a 30 foot wave is no big deal,
great
lakes waves are very close together and very steep. Get down in the
trough
of an ocean wave and the water just rolls underneath you. Get in a
trough
of a good sized wave on the great lakes and you are looking at a near
verticle wall of water.

Remember the "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"? That was a giant (729
foot) lake freighter, which was either broken in two or driven under by
the waves of a Great Lakes November storm. See http://www.ssefo.com/
fore more info.

The Great Lakes are nothing like an inland lake. I've watched many
awesome storms (thankfully from shore) that generated waves of almost
unbelievable violence, frequency and intensity.

And the closest I've ever felt to death was on a small car ferry, crossing
"Death's Door" (the gap between Washington Island and Gill's Rock, at the
tip of the Door Peninsula in Lake Michigan) during an October storm. The
waves were awesome, and the skeletons of many, many wrecks litter the
bottom of Lake Michigan in that area.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.

That isn't what I've heard. There was a show on a few years ago that
analyzed the EF wreck in some detail, I think it was the Discovery
channel, but I'm not 100% sure. They basically concluded that the cause
couldn't be fixed with certainty. There most likely scenario was that
the ship took on water due to loose hold covers and that went under when
hit with a large wave. However, as I recall, the ship wreck was found
in two pieces on the bottom and they weren't sure that the above
scenario could cause that. I don't think that running aground was a
scenario at all given the track of the ship.

Matt

The official verdict of the Coast Guard and NTSB is she floundered due
to heavy damage from waves in 500 feet of water.
http://www.boatnerd.com/fitz/

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
news:Ho4Qe.2389
The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.

Mike
MU-2

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message

The Edmund Fitzgerald ran aground and then sank.

That isn't what I've heard. There was a show on a few years ago that
analyzed the EF wreck in some detail, I think it was the Discovery
channel, but I'm not 100% sure. They basically concluded that the cause
couldn't be fixed with certainty. There most likely scenario was that
the ship took on water due to loose hold covers and that went under when
hit with a large wave. However, as I recall, the ship wreck was found
in two pieces on the bottom and they weren't sure that the above
scenario could cause that. I don't think that running aground was a
scenario at all given the track of the ship.


I saw that one