Currently, payday is on Tuesday. That’s when my unemployment check arrives. Last week I received a big surprise in the mail. When I opened the perforated envelope, instead of a check, there was a note that read as follows:
“THE EMERGENCY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION PROGRAM, FROM WHICH YOU WERE RECEIVING BENEFITS, HAS ENDED. NO EMERGENCY UNEMPLOYMENT CAN BE PAID AFTER CLAIM WEEK ENDING JULY 6, 2009. YOUR BENEFIT ENDING DATE IS 10/10/10. A NEW CLAIM TO DETERMINE ELEGIBILITY FOR REGULAR UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS MAY BE FILED AFTER YOUR BENEFIT YEAR END DATE.”
What???!!!
I’ve read that three times, and I still don’t clearly understand what is says. I checked my balance on line, and there was still funding and a record of the check being issued for that week. When I called the unemployment office the next day to ask someone to explain it to me, they said that it was a mistake, and that checks were issued and sent out that morning. Whew! But who messed up? Was anyone held accountable for scarring the heck out of the dependent masses? Oops, just a typo, so sorry.
Bottom line...I need to find a job!
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
Pentagon spending too much on spare parts?
How much insurance is enough? How many canned goods should we keep stocked on our pantry shelves in the kitchen?
The majority of Americans pay for medical insurance, car insurance, house insurance, and life insurance, hoping they will never need to file a claim. But, in the event that something happens, we take comfort in the fact that we are protected.
Also, if we are fortunate enough, we keep our pantries well stocked with canned goods and dry foods to get us through times where we may be short on fresh food, or if bad weather keeps us stuck at home unable to go out to the local grocery store.
Similarly, the military must maintain an inventory of parts to support equipment throughout the world, in all climates and in all operating conditions. So, when I read the headlines from Reuters that say that the billions of dollars spent by the Pentagon each year is a waste of taxpayer’s money, I get angry that unsuspecting readers will be so easily mislead by reporting that does not offer the complete story.
While there are many methods and formulas for forecasting spare parts requirements for military equipment, “provisioning,” as it’s called, is not an exact science. For example, a particular formula for supporting 100 tanks may call for 20 engines to be kept in the inventory to support repairs that are projected based on the engine’s predicted reliability, the length of time it would take to restock the item, and also what is commonly referred to as “the fudge factor.”
It would be fairly easy to stock parts that would definitely be consumed in a short amount of time, and this would be relatively inexpensive to the “taxpayers.” But when those parts are consumed, we will have equipment that is not operational. That means we have an even more expensive piece of gear that is useless because we didn’t want to spend our precious dollars on “unnecessary” parts. Equipment that sits on the tarmac, the runway, or at the dock, means that we paid for equipment that is no longer protecting our troops or defending our country.
I read that the proposed defense budget for 2010 is about $664 billion. If the spares portion of that is $7 billion, as reported by Reuters, then that means the Pentagon is spending about 1% of its budget on spare parts. To me, that is a pretty low percentage. That would equate to an expense of $300 to repair a $30,000 automobile if a part needed to be replaced. Need I say more?
This is by no means a perfect system, and I believe that the Government personnel reviewing the supply lists that are submitted by equipment manufacturers should do a better job of analyzing what the parts are for, and why they are being recommended as spares. Both the defense contractors and the Government need to be a little more thorough in spare parts recommendations, and offer legitimate justification for each line item on the list proposed for purchase.
It must also be understood, that there are certain parts and quantities that should be kept on hand as insurance items. We don’t want “deadlined” equipment just because we didn’t have a 50-cent bolt on hand that will take a month to order and ship to some remote war zone.
We may not always like it, but it is better for us all to have a little insurance if the time comes when we really need it.
The majority of Americans pay for medical insurance, car insurance, house insurance, and life insurance, hoping they will never need to file a claim. But, in the event that something happens, we take comfort in the fact that we are protected.
Also, if we are fortunate enough, we keep our pantries well stocked with canned goods and dry foods to get us through times where we may be short on fresh food, or if bad weather keeps us stuck at home unable to go out to the local grocery store.
Similarly, the military must maintain an inventory of parts to support equipment throughout the world, in all climates and in all operating conditions. So, when I read the headlines from Reuters that say that the billions of dollars spent by the Pentagon each year is a waste of taxpayer’s money, I get angry that unsuspecting readers will be so easily mislead by reporting that does not offer the complete story.
While there are many methods and formulas for forecasting spare parts requirements for military equipment, “provisioning,” as it’s called, is not an exact science. For example, a particular formula for supporting 100 tanks may call for 20 engines to be kept in the inventory to support repairs that are projected based on the engine’s predicted reliability, the length of time it would take to restock the item, and also what is commonly referred to as “the fudge factor.”
It would be fairly easy to stock parts that would definitely be consumed in a short amount of time, and this would be relatively inexpensive to the “taxpayers.” But when those parts are consumed, we will have equipment that is not operational. That means we have an even more expensive piece of gear that is useless because we didn’t want to spend our precious dollars on “unnecessary” parts. Equipment that sits on the tarmac, the runway, or at the dock, means that we paid for equipment that is no longer protecting our troops or defending our country.
I read that the proposed defense budget for 2010 is about $664 billion. If the spares portion of that is $7 billion, as reported by Reuters, then that means the Pentagon is spending about 1% of its budget on spare parts. To me, that is a pretty low percentage. That would equate to an expense of $300 to repair a $30,000 automobile if a part needed to be replaced. Need I say more?
This is by no means a perfect system, and I believe that the Government personnel reviewing the supply lists that are submitted by equipment manufacturers should do a better job of analyzing what the parts are for, and why they are being recommended as spares. Both the defense contractors and the Government need to be a little more thorough in spare parts recommendations, and offer legitimate justification for each line item on the list proposed for purchase.
It must also be understood, that there are certain parts and quantities that should be kept on hand as insurance items. We don’t want “deadlined” equipment just because we didn’t have a 50-cent bolt on hand that will take a month to order and ship to some remote war zone.
We may not always like it, but it is better for us all to have a little insurance if the time comes when we really need it.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
I Voted Today!
I exercised my American right to vote today. I even did it without flipping a single coin. Here in South Carolina there have been some dirty tactics in the gubernatorial race. We have a female candidate, Nikki Haley, running on the Republican ticket. She was endorsed by Sarah Palin. About a month ago, some political blogger had made a claim that he had an inappropriate encounter with Haley. Then, about a week ago, another guy who had worked for a different candidate in the race made a claim that he had a one night stand with her. On top of all that, Jake Knotts, a SC State senator, called her, and president Obama, a “rag head.” I can’t believe he still has his job. I wonder why people think of this as a “redneck” state?
I feel sorry for Nikki Haley and her family, and truly hope that the allegations are proven false. But certainly her character has been tarnished even more than having that endorsement from Sarah Palin (okay, cheap shot on my part, sorry). I’m probably being unfair to Mrs. Palin. Tina Fey has done such an excellent job of lampooning Sarah that I sometimes get reality and TV comedy confused, especially since the media uses both video clips in their newscasts.
In the end, I voted as well as my independent God-fearing, conservative, pro-lifer, Fair Tax advocating, card-carrying Republican conscience would allow. Tonight, I will say my prayers and sleep peacefully. After all, God is in control.
I feel sorry for Nikki Haley and her family, and truly hope that the allegations are proven false. But certainly her character has been tarnished even more than having that endorsement from Sarah Palin (okay, cheap shot on my part, sorry). I’m probably being unfair to Mrs. Palin. Tina Fey has done such an excellent job of lampooning Sarah that I sometimes get reality and TV comedy confused, especially since the media uses both video clips in their newscasts.
In the end, I voted as well as my independent God-fearing, conservative, pro-lifer, Fair Tax advocating, card-carrying Republican conscience would allow. Tonight, I will say my prayers and sleep peacefully. After all, God is in control.
Monday, June 7, 2010
To be, or not to be?
I attended a local writer's meetup group the other day, and I actually had fun. At first I thought I was going to get that old 'I hate English class' feeling, but it ended up being quite envigorating.
Our moderator gave us a writing assingment to get the juices flowing. The challenge was to take the concept of "boring" and put it into words. I started out trying to write in script, but it's probably been 40 years since I actually did that. So, I reverted to printing, which I do faster and is somewhat more legible than my handwriting. Guess I've never gotten over that L (Low) I received in 2nd grade. I think I discussed that in my blog about being left handed.
I hope to attend more of the writing group meetings, but my time on the beach or kayaking is still a slightly higher priority for me. These are things that Carol and I do together. Maybe after we are both retired and she gets sick of me 24/7, I can make more of these weekend meetings.
The response and encouragement from the others at the meeting did make me think that I could possibly have some creative stories buried inside of me that would provide an interesting read for others. We shall see.
Our moderator gave us a writing assingment to get the juices flowing. The challenge was to take the concept of "boring" and put it into words. I started out trying to write in script, but it's probably been 40 years since I actually did that. So, I reverted to printing, which I do faster and is somewhat more legible than my handwriting. Guess I've never gotten over that L (Low) I received in 2nd grade. I think I discussed that in my blog about being left handed.
I hope to attend more of the writing group meetings, but my time on the beach or kayaking is still a slightly higher priority for me. These are things that Carol and I do together. Maybe after we are both retired and she gets sick of me 24/7, I can make more of these weekend meetings.
The response and encouragement from the others at the meeting did make me think that I could possibly have some creative stories buried inside of me that would provide an interesting read for others. We shall see.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Kayak for sale
There was an ad in the Sunday paper offering a kayak for sale. It read: “KAYAK, TWO MAN, Plastic composite, manuf: Prijon, model: Odyssee. Sea going Kayak with rutter. Call ---- at -----. Ask $995”
I told my wife that I wanted to call the person, and advise them on the spelling error. I imagine the call would go something like this:
“Hello, I’m calling about the kayak that is listed in the paper.”
“Yes?” they respond enthusiastically.
“Well, I wanted to let you know that rudder is spelled r-u-d-d-e-r, not r-u-t-t-e-r. I’m not really interested in the kayak, but I’m an editor and I thought I’d let you know that you had a misspelling in your ad. Oh, and my wife says that you should change the description to say TANDEM rather than TWO MAN, because there are women who also like to paddle. Hope you don’t mind our inputs.”
“Screw you!”
[CLICK]
Anyway, the thought of doing it gave us both a laugh, but I'm sure that someone would take offense at my constructive criticism.
It seems to be an older boat that has been replaced by the Excursion model, which is over 81 lbs. This is one of the drawbacks to having a tandem boat, bigger is heavier, especially in plastic. But, if you’re looking for a used boat, check out the ad for yourself.
I told my wife that I wanted to call the person, and advise them on the spelling error. I imagine the call would go something like this:
“Hello, I’m calling about the kayak that is listed in the paper.”
“Yes?” they respond enthusiastically.
“Well, I wanted to let you know that rudder is spelled r-u-d-d-e-r, not r-u-t-t-e-r. I’m not really interested in the kayak, but I’m an editor and I thought I’d let you know that you had a misspelling in your ad. Oh, and my wife says that you should change the description to say TANDEM rather than TWO MAN, because there are women who also like to paddle. Hope you don’t mind our inputs.”
“Screw you!”
[CLICK]
Anyway, the thought of doing it gave us both a laugh, but I'm sure that someone would take offense at my constructive criticism.
It seems to be an older boat that has been replaced by the Excursion model, which is over 81 lbs. This is one of the drawbacks to having a tandem boat, bigger is heavier, especially in plastic. But, if you’re looking for a used boat, check out the ad for yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
