PFBA - The Future & Automation

The employee complains about “the man.” The employer complains about the cost of labor. In the end, the employers are gaining an upper hand. They have been for some time.

First, companies are able to have their goods manufactured in parts of the world where people live on slave wages at best. These companies can then import those goods back into the United States and sell them cheaper than they sell goods made right here to home. How is it that a television set can sail across the ocean and still sell for less than a television set built here? However it happens, that’s what has taken place. Globalization just pushes the pedal to the floor in the process.

For those companies that cannot import their goods from other countries, namely, service industries and agriculture business, the companies have pushed for lax laws that allow cheap labor to flood into America. These are the illegal immigrants. Those Americans who cry foul, including those in the traditionally organized labor camp, are told that complaining is tantamount to racism. Nobody wants to be a racist, do they? Of course not, so it’s an effective way to quiet the resistance.

Here’s the question. When you have so many Americans sitting out of work, and are trying to automate more jobs, just who will have any money to purchase these goods and services?

These companies have found ways to squeeze more and more out of their labor force and the profits that were once spread across an entire workforce are now being pocketed by those at the top of the corporate ladder. This is evidenced by a truth that hardly anyone disagrees with; the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.

These titans of industry are now turning to the Democratic Party and aligning themselves with socialists. They are calling for people to be given “free” this and “free” that, but none of them are willing to pay higher taxes, or, God forbid, pay higher wages to their employees.

When companies pay a good living wage to their employees, their employees can afford to purchase goods and that is good for the economy. Also, by paying a good wage, employees no longer have to turn to the government for help. Walmart and McDonald’s both pay such low wages that the United States government subsidizes their labor costs. Most McDonald’s and Walmart employees cannot raise a family or live on their wages alone, and therefore turn to heat, health, and food assistance. Walmart’s owners are some of the richest in the world. They have enough money stuffed away that their great grandchildren will be rich. Imagine if that money had been spread amongst their workforce. Think of the savings to the government, aka; You, the taxpayer.

Here are some changes that would make the situation better.

1.      Tax any money not paid out to hourly employees. In other words, if a company makes billions and pays a paltry wage, they will be taxed heavily on that money because odds are, their employees are accepting government assistance. This will encourage companies to pay better wages as opposed to paying taxes. Either way, that money will be spent on the employees. I believe most companies would rather pay the money directly.

2.      Tax automation. If the government taxes automation and uses that money for the poor, many businesses may forgo automation and keep real people employed. The only time machines should be used is for dangerous work, which should be taxed at a low rate. We would rather have robots do dangerous work.

3.      Companies should be taxed for exporting jobs. If a job could be done in America, and it is not, the goods should be taxed to compensate for the under-employed. This could be pegged to the unemployment rate. In other words, if few are unemployed, it may make sense to have items made abroad. If certain items are meant to be made abroad, like Chinese silk, or Pakistani rugs, then that should not be taxed as high. There’s no reason that televisions are made overseas and shipped here cheaper than they can be made here.

We already use our tax system to influence people’s behavior. Corporations are not people. It’s true that they are made up of people who have collectively invested their money, but most corporations are run by a select few people, who in almost every case, are paid astronomical wages compared to most company employees, and they have fantastic benefit and severance packages. This is money that could be used to lift the lifestyles and retirements of their employees, while still allowing those at the top to be filthy rich. The only difference is that they won’t have as many succeeding generations able to inherit the wealth.

I am a capitalist, but a personal capitalist. I am not a corporate capitalist. I am also not a globalist. I believe in being a part of the global system, but I believe in forced diversity. Those who are globalists are trying to homogenize the world, to essentially form a world monopoly of power and influence. A monopoly is not a good thing. While having multiple different governments and systems is a pain in the ass to multi-national corporations, it is good for humanity. Diversity is good.

Do you ever think of me?

I still think of you. I remember those nights out under the stars. I bared my soul to you. Those nights with you were magical, just laying there, looking up to heaven with you.

I told you that I would have married you and I meant it. Still, all these years later, you are one of three women that I have loved not counting family. I have loved two other women, but none the same as I loved you.

I have thought hard about why things happened the way they did. For me, you loved me one moment, and hated me the next. It made no sense and for years it ate away at me. It wasn’t until I got older that it started to make sense.

I remember our last night together before you left for awhile. I also recall a phone call before that where you felt you might be in “trouble”. I remember a while after that when you told someone’s father that you had the same sort of trouble, which wasn’t true, but I wondered why you had said that.

Yes, years later I have wondered if you were. I wonder if you went and had done what I think you had done. I never knew. I suppose you wanted to protect your reputation. However, I wish you would have gone through instead of ending it. I wish it didn’t have to be the way it turned out. But I don’t blame you.

Long ago, I moved on in life, but it took awhile. I married, had children, and divorced. I remarried again and have had more children. But I have always wondered, “what if?”, but I have accepted my lot in life. It doesn’t matter. I have been blessed with a wonderful family; wonderful children.

If it is as I suspect, I don’t blame you. I did love you. I would have continued loving you.  I will always remember you and the time we spent together, and what may have been. I will take that to my grave. 

Truth on the Jones Act 09/28/2017

After much investigation today, I learned;
 

The Jones Act does not prevent ships from foreign countries to enter Puerto Rico. It prevents foreign ships from taking supplies from American Ports to Puerto Rico. If Mexico sent a ship to Puerto Rico, it could do so.
 

Where people are saying the Jones Act is "strangling" Puerto Rico is that there are ships delivering goods in American ports right now that want to haul supplies to Puerto Rico and they cannot because they are a foreign ship and cannot ship from one American port to another. An American ship has to do that.
 

They say there are a ton of supplies sitting in San Juan right now, but that there is a large shortage of truck drivers to distribute the goods. The Jones Act doesn't affect truck drivers in Puerto Rico.
 

As soon as the governor of Puerto Rico asked for the Jones Act to be suspended, Trump did it. Before that, many people told Trump that Puerto Rico was getting plenty of supplies but where the problem lay was in distribution.
 

Regarding the Jones Act for Florida and Texas, hell if I know other than a couple of news articles that I read said that the push for that suspension came from politicians in those states, but that Puerto Rico has little representation in our government.
 

Blame politics. All parties are guilty of it.

 

Socialism or Capitalism? The NFL Decides......

Imagine if you had someone mow your lawn and they left one wide strip in protest of what police were doing to black people.

Imagine that you ordered breakfast somewhere and they gave you eggs sunny-side-up instead of scrambled because they are protesting what they perceive police are doing to black people amounts to brutality.

Imagine if you went to the Emergency Room and the nurse decided to take a knee for one minute before doing their job. There you are, needing help, and your nurse is taking a knee, looking you in the eye, and telling you it’s in protest of one cause or another.

Imagine you had an employee of any sort, and they start doing things against the rules because they are protesting something totally unrelated to what it is that you are doing. Would you not have the right to fire them? Do they have a right to protest on your time, when you are paying them to do a job? Are they entitled to have you pay for their protest?

What if your employee, known for working for you and representing you, goes out and acts in a way that reflects badly upon you or your business. Do you not have a right to sever ties with that employee?

This is what is happening in the NFL and other sports right now. EMPLOYEES are protesting on company time, and are making statements while on their boss’s dime that may or may not hurt their employer’s position. Unless their employer specifically asks them to do these things, the employees have no right to protest on company time.

Socialism teaches that people have a right to work regardless of the position of their employer. Capitalism says that the boss is always right.

Which side are you on? Are you a socialist or a capitalist? What if you were the boss in this situation?

 

 

 

Canning Tomatoes - Eric E. Durnan method

Do you have questions about canning tomatoes? I did too, but got tired of all the bad information on the internet. I have been canning for over 6 years now and I have learned a lot in those 6 years, especially in the area of canning tomatoes. The one problem that I had early on was “tomato float.” This is where you can tomatoes only to find later that the tomatoes are floating to the top while you have a quarter of the jar full of water on the bottom. Some people have written that the water on the bottom is actually juice, but it isn’t. It’s water. I’ll tell you how I know.

For many years, I drove semi and hauled fluid milk and other dairy products. While a lot of the milk that I hauled went into bottling, a bunch of it went into making cheese as well. One by-product of cheese making is whey. Whey in its raw form is a nasty greenish looking water with some foam and bits of cheese. This is milk with most of the solids removed, but there are still solids in this whey. I don’t think I ever hauled a load of raw whey, but I saw what it looked like plenty of times. I went to dairies where farmers showed up to collect the raw whey to feed to hogs or spread out on their fields. This was mainly done at the smaller cheese plants that I saw in Wisconsin.

Most of the time, either the cheese plant, or a dedicated whey plant, would condense the whey down by using reverse osmosis or ultra-filtration. Rarely did I see heat used for this purpose. The water that was taken out was called “cow water” and they would pipe it down into the trucking bays for us to wash our trucks with it. I never tasted it. It was labeled non-potable, and it had a slight sheen to it when you sprayed it. In the end, it was water that was once in the cow’s udder, mixed with the milk solids.

Once condensed, the whey was transported or dried on site. Nobody wanted to ship raw whey as that was seen as shipping water. There were different levels of condensed whey. Some looked like a slightly thicker than milk consistency which I was told was equivalent to 8 semi-loads of raw whey. Then there was stuff that was nearly as thick as Elmer’s Glue which was so heavy that the tank could only be partially filled and it was a really rough trip to the processor as that whey moved around with a ton of room, and the same weight as a full load. One processor that we took this highly condensed whey to was in Colfax, Wisconsin and he told me that he liked the really thick stuff because it meant less work for him making it into powder. Since it was so thick, the sugars in the whey would separate out and stick to the bottom of the tank, necessitating a steam clean out.

Not only was whey condensed by removing water, but milk in it’s raw form is often condensed, and even canned. Often times, milk is dried all the way down to powder.

Does this mean that you can get your original product back by adding water back in? The answer in every case that I’m aware of is no. Processing changes food in irreversible ways. Whether it be dairy products, or tomatoes, once you process them, you’ll never be able to get the goodness of the original back.

When I noticed tomatoes floating in my jar, my years of hauling dairy products told me that the problem was too much water. Others make arguments about pectin, air bubbles, and a host of other reasons. Regardless of pectin or air bubbles, it’s obvious that separation has taken place and what you see on the bottom of the jar is water.

It’s for this reason that I decided to remove excess water from my tomatoes before canning. My canned tomatoes are exclusively used for cooking anyhow, so cooking my tomatoes down can either happen before or after canning, and it makes more sense to cook them down before and use less jars.

Here is my process. I prepare my tomatoes by cutting out the stem area and any other bad spots it may have. I have a pan of hot water that was boiled, then the fire shut off so that the temperature of the water is just under boiling. I dip my prepared tomatoes into the hot water for a short while and then transfer them to a strainer in my sink where the skins are removed. At this point, the tomato is transferred to another pan. Once finished, I put a lid on this pan of skinned tomatoes and cock the lid to let steam escape. I turn on the heat and bring my tomatoes up to a slow simmer and let them cook down. I mash them with a potato masher and essentially make tomato sauce, but chunky. After simmering the better part of a day, I transfer them into jars and water bath as usual. If they are low acid tomatoes, then I add a little lemon juice or pressure can 10 pounds for 10 minutes. Don’t take my word on the weight and time. I’m not the USDA. It’s just what works for my family.

We always check our jars for a good seal before opening and we always cook our canned products before consuming. If they smell or look bad, we dump them. I haven’t had that problem yet in six years with anything I’ve canned. I have had a few things others have canned and been given to me that hasn’t passed the test.

Going this route has saved me space in my pantry and the cost of many lids for many jars. I don’t get “tomato float” anymore. Cooking the tomatoes down almost sweetens the flavor as well as make it bolder and more prominent. It’s certainly not watery. Doing tomatoes this way goes well in making any kind of sauce or chili. It’s also good for goulash.

I have thought of adding other things to my tomatoes before canning, like onion and basil, but have found that the flavor changes because of the processing. I only add some salt now to my jars before canning and add everything else after I open the jar back up. 

Roseanne's Return

It seems that Roseanne is returning to our televisions soon. She even tweeted a reply to me that Norm MacDonald will be along for the ride. I assume he will be a writer for the show, and hopefully he'll get a little screen time as well. He's brilliant! It has been reported that Roseanne will tackle issues in a Trump era. I haven’t read anything from Roseanne regarding the meaning of this, but Roseanne is a supporter of Trump, and I assume her character will be, or will she?

I grew up in the Roseanne era. I still remember watching an early Roseanne on the Johnny Carson show doing a number about a sugar coma. I don’t remember the entire bit, but I remember my mother, who I thought was the funniest woman alive, laugh out loud at Roseanne. If my mother, my comic idol, loved Roseanne, then I knew there was something special about her.

When Roseanne, the television show, hit the airwaves, I was impressed by a show that showed a family very much like the one that I lived in. It wasn’t the white-washed family of the 50’s through early 70’s. It wasn’t the goofy families of the late 70’s and early 80’s. It was gritty, down to earth, and realistic. Along the way, the show tackled many subjects, while all the while having a good time, entertaining us with a show that even kids could watch.

You can’t say that about many comedies on television today. The shows have become ultra-liberal, geared towards the east and west coasts, and they are so filthy that I don’t want my kids watching them. Roseanne dealt with adult subjects in a way that the adults got the joke, while the kids didn’t, but both laughed. Old fashioned Looney Tune cartoons had the same brilliance. When you can create something for the old and young alike, you have mined gold.

So, what will Roseanne in the 21^st century look like? First, we’ve been told that Dan will be back despite us learning that he died. Roseanne mentioned somewhere that he faked his own death. Maybe even better will be Roseanne having a nervous breakdown, and living in a life where she couldn’t tell dream from reality? What about the kids? Will they return to having been Becky hooked up with Mark and Darlene with David? That doesn’t mean that they would have to be together today. In many cases, few early adult relationships last. Odds are, Beck and Mark are split up and fight over custody from time to time. We know Sara Gilbert is gay in real life, and I did have a first cousin whose wife left him for another woman. So, could Darlene have done the same, but still be on friendly terms with David? Maybe David’s line could be, “Well, I didn’t have what Darlene was looking for?” That would be a vagina, folks! I always told my cousin that. I always felt it would be easier to lose a woman to another woman instead of another man because there’s no way I could compete with another woman!

What about DJ? What is in store for his character? Will Jackie be back? Families change over time. People move out, some move in, my family looks very different than it did 20 years ago. There are those who were very close 20 years ago who barely talk to one another today.

What about this political angle that keeps being reported. Will Rosie be more conservative in her older years? Or, will Roseanne play the opposite, and play off as a liberal? Just because Roseanne may play her character as a conservative doesn’t mean her whole family will be. In fact, it wouldn’t make for much fodder for the writers if everyone was on the same page politically. Does anyone remember hearing about that couple that divorced over Trump last fall? Roseanne could play the conservative leaning character to Dan’s liberal leaning character, and in the end, it could show us that even though loved ones disagree, it is possible to find common ground on other important issues, like family, and keep loving the person you disagree with politically. Of course, Roseanne and Norm MacDonald could keep us in stitches while showing us this fact over and over.

I’ve watched the Full House reboot and there is one thing that bothers me about it. It’s too fake. The premise isn’t based in reality. Roseanne will hopefully not go down this route. How do you bring in old characters, like children, back into the home, especially when they should be on their own with families of their own? Well, many millenials are living at home with their parents. Having all three kids living under the roof would be unbelievable, but having DJ still living at home, continually going to college because he can’t find a good job, while growing deeper and deeper into student debt would be very realistic, while making for good script. I mean, don’t we all know a “professional student” or three in our own life? I have a brother who is one. He works as an auto parts man. He’s the highest educated auto parts man that I know, and he has $100,000 in student loans to go with it, so he keeps going back to college! I don’t know how he’ll ever be able to buy a house at this rate, and he’s 38 years old with no family of his own. That’s real life. Maybe that’ll be DJ’s life?

What about the girls? I hope they aren’t living to home. They could live nearby though. It’s not uncommon to find children who stay close to home. My sister lives across town from my mother. She’s a single mother and uses my mother to help watch the younger children from time to time. Maybe one of Roseanne’s daughters could live across town and be the daughter who “imposes” upon Roseanne and Dan for babysitting, groceries, and helping to put gas in the car. That would be real life. Maybe Roseanne and Dan will have to borrow from a successful child? That is reality in today's world too.

What about the heroin epidemic in our country? Will Roseanne tackle that? What if Roseanne is raising her grandchildren because one of the kids is hooked on drugs? That too is real life today. It could tackle the problem in a real life way, while still being funny. What if Darlene is the one with the heroin problem, and Roseanne is raising her kids. Becky likes to impose upon Roseanne, but Roseanne has a little fun switching the tables on Becky and dropping kids in on her at inopportune times? The cousins could also gang up on other family members. That would make for great comedy. I know my cousins and I would get into great mischief when we were younger.

            The fact is, Dan and Roseanne should be retired, but I can only assume, like so many families today, they are probably still working because they don’t have enough money to retire on, and because they have to raise their grandchildren and help the other kids out. That is reality in our world today. Will they still have the restaurant? Will Dan have a bike shop? I was sort of hoping that they would run a blue-collar tavern. What a great place to have different people come in and talk about everything affecting the working class today. Like Cheers, it would give Roseanne’s writers a place to work out a lot of material. Plus, I like the thought of having special guests pop through Roseanne’s tavern. Roseanne did these great skits in her original show with guest stars. Wouldn’t it be neat to see people pop into the bar and say stuff to crack us up? The Dukes of Hazzard used to have Roscoe’s speed trap that would catch country music stars and they’d have to play at the Boar’s Nest to have Roscoe tear the ticket up. Maybe there can be a running gag that draws celebrities into Rosie's bar for a drink? Maybe there can be a place that all these celebrities are looking for and their satellite navigation gets them lost and points them to Rosie's bar. They stop in for a drink and when they're finished, Roseanne gives them real directions, the old fashioned way, by word of mouth. Think what fun they could have with Bob Uecker, Tim Allen, or maybe president Trump stopping by! Norm MacDonald writing for Bob Uecker in a bar would be comedy gold, especially if Roseanne is behind the bar! Of course, this is all just make believe in my mind. I’m sure Roseanne knows what she wants to do with her show and it probably isn’t anything near what I’ve written. But if you're reading this Roseanne, feel free to steal my ideas!

I look forward to seeing her show. Whatever she does, she is brilliant, and I am confident her brilliance will be on full display. She is like my mother. She’s smart. She’s confident. She’s as funny as they come. I come from a line of strong women and I can relate to Roseanne. I look forward to her brand of blue-collar comedy on the television again.

Climate Change Religion

This whole climate change argument has become religious. Those who subscribe to man-made climate change have become religious fanatics about it. They don't allow for any skepticism. Anyone who dares challenge the notion that man is the main reason for climate change is labeled the equivalent of a heretic. Those of us who are agnostic to the notion aren't offered the same common decency that other religious agnostics are afforded in America. There are some even calling for us ...to be imprisoned. Google it and you'll see that I am telling the truth.

This is scientific fact. Here in Iowa, there is evidence of both major glaciation, as well as Iowa being covered by water. The ground shows the glaciation and the limestone fossils show the water. Right now, we're somewhere in between. Scientitst themselves tell us that the last glacial event happened when Paleo-Indians were in Iowa. This means, within the time that man has been here in Iowa, we've seen the loss of glaciers, as well as the loss of the giant animals that used to roam here. Was that global warming? That happened in a blink of an eye too, on the earth being billions of years old scale.

Scientists say that earth has never warmed this quickly. Really? Who's to say? Ice cores? Who's to say that the rate of warming has to be constant? The sun isn't constant. Nothing is constant. Maybe this is a quick warm-up compared to others and man has nothing to do with it? To even postulate this is heretical now.

The problem with ascribing to this man-made global warming religion is that it involves placing heavy burdens on the poor and transferring American wealth and sovereignty to others. It's a tool for those creating vast sums of wealth based upon fear. Listen to the people screaming about Trump pulling out of the Paris accord. They are full of fear!

A final note. Those who ascribe to the belief that we evolved instead of being created tell us that it's survival of the fittest. Only the strong survive, as well as those who have been able to adapt. Shouldn't we be adapting to a changing climate instead of trying to change the climate? Do you realize how kooky that sounds? Man will control the climate? We're not talking about environmentalism, where we protect our water and air. We've been doing that long before this Paris accord. Christ, our water is cleaner now than it was in the 70's. Anyone else remember the acid rain terror?

BTW - When will the proponents of climate change, like Al Gore, start practicing what they preach? Only when they quit flying around in their private jets and taking limousine rides, I might get like Alfred E. Neuman in 1979 and start getting nervous. Until then, "What......me worry?"

The only time Alfred E. Neuman got worried. 1979 Three Mile Island incident.