Hybrid Vehicles

By Edward Smallwood

I fully expect to be misquoted on this at some later date. I’m going to do my best to make that difficult. Here's the statement that will most likely be misquoted: I am not happy with the design of any production hybrid vehicle available today. Most of my reasons for disliking the designs are fairly technical, but I will attempt to make them understandable.

Current production hybrid vehicles all have the same thing in common under the hood. They have an electric motor powered by batteries built into an internal combustion engine. Essentially, they are gas-powered vehicles with really big starter motors and a big battery. There are several problems with this, some of which can be addressed after you buy one by modifying it, but some are inherent to the design and can't be changed easily.

No current production hybrid vehicle can be plugged into a wall and have the battery recharged. All of them must use gasoline to recharge the battery unless modified, voiding the warranty. Some people are modifying the Prius so that it has a larger battery and built-in recharger so that you can recharge the battery when you get home or to work. This can increase fuel economy of the Prius to about 100MPG for normal around-town driving. But what this design decision made by the auto makers means is that every mile you run your hybrid car, even if you are running off of battery power only, is being powered by gasoline.

I’m going to digress and discuss the differences between electric motors and internal combustion engines for a moment. Please trust me that I will try to keep it understandable. Electric motors basically use strong magnetic fields to move either a set of coils or a metal cage in a circular motion. The only point of friction (force that takes energy instead of using that energy to move the car) is the bearings at either end of the motor (and a little bit due to air circulation within the motor.) In most internal combustion engines used today, gasoline mixed with air is exploded in a little chamber. This explosion forces a piston to move in a straight line away from the explosion, and then a part called a crank-shaft changes that straight line motion into a circular motion used to drive the engine. The piston has to overcome friction along the walls of the chamber the explosion happens in, as well as that in the bearings in the crank-shaft. In addition to providing the force to move the car, this energy is used to move valves, water to cool the engine, circulate the oil, and many other parts in the engine that do not add power to the system.

This may not be terribly interesting until you realize that every Hybrid vehicle has both of these kinds of engines by definition. Now, imagine that the electric motor of the Hybrid car is hooked directly to the internal combustion engine. Even when you are running on electricity only, your electric motor is turning the internal combustion engine. You suddenly gain an enormous amount of friction that is not part of an electric motor simply by turning the internal combustion engine. So you lose some of the natural efficiency of the electric motor there.

Electric motors are more efficient at more speeds in general than internal combustion engines. This is why we need a transmission in most cars. If you look at the old Saturn electric car it did not have a transmission. It was able to go from a standstill to highway speeds directly from the electric motor. A transmission is made up of gears changing the speed of the motor into a useful turning of the wheels, at least in cars with internal combustion engines. Since an electric car has no need of all of these gears, all adding friction to the system, throwing a transmission into a production electric car would not be a good idea. It would cut into the efficiency of the electric motor. However, all current production Hybrid cars have this system.

There are so many different factors sapping power in these cars that I wondered how they actually compared to much older cars, as far as Mileage was concerned. I went to the government web site to check current mileages, and when I compared a 2008 Prius to a 1989 Geo Metro, I discovered that they get exactly the same combined mileage. Yes, both come out at 46MPG combined city and highway. A car built 19 years ago by an American company got the same mileage as the best we can do today. At least, that's what Toyota wants us to believe.

Most people are unaware that we have a better Hybrid system available today that is being used throughout the world. The fact is that internal combustion engines can be wonderfully efficient power plants in a narrow range of speeds. Current battery technology actually isn't as efficient as a well-tuned internal combustion engine directly connected to an electric generator. This is why all modern diesel-electric trains use a system where a diesel engine turns an electric generator, which powers the electric motors that move the train. I have heard that an American company is planning to make a production Hybrid car that uses a system like this, with a battery thrown in. If they add the ability to plug this thing into the wall to charge up the battery, I can't fault this design. I see no reason they could not make the generator an option, or a module that could be replaced. This would allow most users to simply replace the generator with an extra battery for general home-to-work commuting, and replace that battery with the generator for long-haul vacations and road-trips when you may actually need that kind of range.

I would like to see a car with this kind of power system, and if it actually got better mileage than a 1989 Geo Metro, I would feel good buying an American designed and built car for the first time in my adult life.

I might briefly add ad this point that I do not see Hydrogen as a reasonable alternative to gasoline. It doesn’t matter if we directly burn it in an internal combustion engine, or if we use it to produce electricity in fuel-cells. Most hydrogen used today is produced directly from oil, and since it takes more energy to produce it than it provides, it is not a fuel, but rather an energy storage medium much like a battery. The same will be true even if we use electricity to break hydrogen out of water. Since it is very difficult to store safely in any useful amounts, it will take much longer for it to be useful to us in any way, if it ever does, than simply switching to a hybrid as outlined above. Also, we have yet to completely analyze the effects of wide-spread hydrogen use on the environment. Some preliminary analyses suggest that escaping hydrogen gas could have drastic effects on the environment if we switch to a hydrogen economy.

In addition, I do not see ethanol as a long-term solution. Right now in this country we are seeing corn prices increasing as our food is being consumed to make fuel. This is already having an impact on movie theaters as wholesale popcorn prices increase. Expect your snacks to have a price increase very shortly. Cellulosic ethanol made from corn stalks or switchgrass is still too difficult to make in industrial amounts to make a significant dent in our oil use in this country. Do not expect alternative fuels to change the way we drive.

So, Detroit, the ball is now firmly in your court. Can you meet the challenge? We’re all depending on you.

The Current State of Affairs

By Ed Smallwood

Why would I believe that we are at the brink of a major financial collapse, you may ask? I have a tendency to believe that everyone is on the same page as I am, forgetting that I read much faster than most people, excepting notably my father. While that seems like a joke, it’s also fairly true.

The first reason I believe that we’re at the brink of a financial collapse that I can’t see the end of, is because my father has been saying for my entire life that we’re on the long slide as a civilization. For a significant portion of my life I had to take this on faith. As I got older I saw the signs myself. Here are the ones that I can communicate to most people in summary.

1. Energy. Basically, any geologist who has studied oil reserves and is independent from the oil companies agrees that we are past, at, or soon to be at Hubbard’s Peak—the point where we are no longer able to increase production of oil. From this point on, demand will almost certainly be larger than the ability to meet it through any method of supply. Oil is the basis of the vast majority of our energy production. It is also the raw material used in virtually all plastic production. It is not reasonable to use corn to produce ethanol to replace our gasoline supply. I will go into that more below. Representative Roscoe Bartlett (R-Maryland) made an excellent one hour speech in front of the House of Representatives on February 28^th of this year on the subject of peak oil. I strongly recommend that you watch it at Energy Policy TV, or read the transcript at The House of Representatives. This will act as a primer for those of you unfamiliar with the topic. It’s also very nice to see that a Republican Politician is on the same page as I am. I didn’t think that was the case.

2. Climate and agriculture. Global warming is a part of this equation. So is desert encroachment. The major deserts of the planet are getting larger, and engulfing what was fertile farm land. It doesn’t matter the continent. Everywhere you look, it’s getting worse. This is something that could be stabilized if we’re willing to plant trees at the borders, but it will take work. And right now there doesn’t seem to be much urgency about this, and with a growing population this is going to be a major problem sooner rather then later. Fresh water is also a problem. Water may be one of the most plentiful substances on the planet, but most of it is polluted with salt making it impossible to drink without processing. Much of the fresh water that could be used for agricultural purposes is being diverted for industrial uses instead. In addition, much of the fresh water used in agricultural areas comes from “fossil aquifers,” underground water sources that are not being refilled from natural sources as they are being used. This is the case in the American Midwest, as well as much of China as well.

3. Economy. With an energy supply that is going to become more expensive whatever we do, and an agriculture that is going to suffer from lack of water, our economy is going to shrink regardless. Everything is going to become more expensive to make and transport. It is not reasonable to expect us to use or food supply (corn) to make a substantial amount of fuel (ethanol.) Even if we could, it won’t be cheap enough. This is a classic “Overshoot and Collapse” type economy. Currently, cheap credit is becoming harder to come by. People can’t borrow enough to keep our economy running. The AP is reporting that jobs are being slashed at an increasing rate (Dangerous cracks appearing in job market,) and U.S. News and World Report is reporting that auto repossessions are at their highest level in 10 years (Auto Repossessions Hit Record High).

4. Leadership. We have none on any of these topics. Creditors are running around like chickens with their heads cut off, with no standardization on how to deal with customers who are tapped out on credit. Government is in complete and total denial over peak oil, global warming, the economy, national debt, and pretty much everything else you can think of. The White House would much rather say that things are overstated then actually attempt to lead on any of these issues and prevent what is likely to be a rocky road ahead from becoming a cliff that we will plunge over, sooner rather then later. Mr. Bush is likely to be seen historically much like Herbert Hoover.

If you have further questions about these, or just want more information, I recommend Lester Brown’s Plan B 2.0: Rescuing a Planet Under Stress and a Civilization in Trouble.

We now have a chance to do something about these problems. Time has not run out on us yet, but doing nothing is a choice that we make. A representative from Texas (I can’t remember who, and can’t find him online at this time—I’ll update this post when I find him) compared the idea espoused by Rep. Bartlett of increasing funding for alternative energy to gambling with our future. I would like to say that the Representative from Texas is also gambling, letting it ride on bet we know is bound to bust eventually. Probably sooner rather than later.

The Upcoming Economic Collapse

By Ed Smallwood

In my life, there have been moments where I have been demonstrably wrong. When Yugoslavia broke apart I believed at the time that the father of the current President Bush should recognize Bosnia as an independent country. I went along with the conventional wisdom, and did not see that Serbia would invade and cause so much misery and death.

However, there are times when I am right. Usually this happens when I have good information. An example is with the current situation in Iraq. I believed before we got into Iraq it would be a disaster to do so. I heard from people who had been weapons inspectors in Iraq that there were definitely no weapons of mass destruction there. I read voraciously and discovered that there was no link between Saddam Hussein and al Queda. In fact, you wouldn’t even say that Saddam and Osama even liked each other if you were well informed at the time right before the invasion.

This is one of those times in my life that I really hope I’m wrong. Unfortunately, I don’t think so. I feel like I’m pretty well informed on this topic.

Here is the situation we are facing right now. For most of my life, we have been exporting our jobs. In the ‘70s and ‘80s, we exported many of our manufacturing jobs to countries like Japan. The theory was that these jobs would be replaced with high-tech jobs. This did happen to some extent. Then starting in the ‘90s, we started “outsourcing” our tech jobs. There really isn’t any reason these jobs have to be done in the U.S. when you can transmit the result of that work anywhere in the world in seconds using email. It makes good business sense to have the work done in the cheapest market possible, at least in theory.

If you follow unemployment figures you wouldn’t realize what’s been happening. This is because many of the people who lost their high paying high-tech jobs went into the service industry in some way, canceling out the lost job but not the lost wages. I’m a good example. I used to be a Quality Assurance Analyst (hardware and software) at a small high-tech company. When I was laid off a month after 9/11 I had enough saved up to stay out of the workforce for a year. I got a job at a local movie theater as a projectionist. I’ve worked my way up to House Manager, but I’m still not making as much as I was when I was laid off at the high-tech company. Nobody I’ve kept contact with that was laid off from the same company went back into high-tech. None. Many of the projectionists that I worked with when I first started at the theater were from the same background as me. I was working with hardware engineers, software engineers, sysadmins, and others. People that have a lot of valuable knowledge. One of them got back into high-tech. The others are either still working at the theater, or went on to other service industry jobs.

For those people who have stayed in the high-tech industry or other well paying jobs requiring a degree, they now have to compete with people coming into this country with H1-b visas. I’m going to be blunt: There is only one reason to have these visas--to increase competition for jobs and decrease wages in this country. You cannot convince me that there aren’t enough engineers in this country to fill job vacancies. I know too many of them personally.

So, the first element of our looming financial disaster is a real-world reduction of income, even though people are working. Our workers cannot keep the economy afloat with a decreasing income.

So if our workers aren’t making enough to keep the economy afloat, how about if they spend the money that they’ve saved? I did that between the time I was laid off from high-tech until I started working at the theater. I was very lucky to make it as long as I did. The reality at this point is that people’s savings rates in this country are at rock bottom. They haven’t been this low since the Great Depression.

Okay, income is out, savings are out. How about credit? Can we spend our way out of the coming financial disaster with credit? Oh, heck no. That’s actually the big problem right now. The Housing Bubble collapse is all about this. In addition to being a House Manager at a movie theater, I’m also a Real Estate Agent and REALTOR®, so I have a fair amount of knowledge about this. Through much of this decade, people were able to borrow against the equity of their homes. This allowed them to continue spending money and keep the economy afloat. As long as housing prices kept going up, this could continue.

However, nothing lasts forever. In the last 18 months, people started to realize that the low, introductory rates on their mortgages were going to go up, and they would be expected to make payments they couldn’t afford. At the same time, people stopped buying homes, forcing home prices to stagnate or start to drop. Those facing higher mortgage payments couldn’t or can’t refinance their way out of it. As these people fall behind in their mortgage payments, their credit scores start to drop like a brick, and they lose the ability to borrow money through their credit cards. This brings their spending to a screeching halt, and hurts the economy in the process. If their home is finally foreclosed on their credit scores will be nailed to a low level for the next ten years.

Okay, so a few people will have bad credit for the next decade. Who cares? Well, according to my sources, as many as two out of three homes in the Stockton/Sacramento area of California are expected to be foreclosed on in the next 18 months. Also, as much as 90% of the homes for sale in the Los Angeles basin are hoping to be sold short. In my section of San Jose, about 35% of homes listed are short-sale hopefuls as of a few minutes ago. In case you don’t know what a short sale is, it’s when the bank agrees to allow the owner to sell the house for less than they owe and consider the loan paid for anyway. This saves the borrower’s credit score, and keeps the bank from having to go through the expense of foreclosure. Not a bad deal, if it works, which is hardly guaranteed.

Either way, the lender isn’t going to get back what they loaned out. The borrower is out of their house, probably with no savings whatsoever and less than stellar credit.

So we can’t spend our personal funds to stimulate the economy, because we don’t have it. How about the government? Can they prime the economy?

Not really. We’re spending trillions to stay in Iraq and lose in Afghanistan. With the tax cuts for the rich that we’ve had, and the administration’s insistence on keeping them, we have nothing on the federal level to spend. Unless we borrow and put the country even more in debt, which will cause interest rates to climb, and inflation to take an even larger bite out of your now lower paycheck.

This is why the stock markets have been so jittery lately. International economists are really worried right now, because much of the world’s economy is based on the idea that other countries make stuff that the United States buys. They are rightly worried that their economies are going to suffer when this cycle of goods and cash flow is interrupted.

Now, throw in the fact that we are probably past peak oil production and fuel and plastics are likely to go up in price from now on, and you can see just how bad things are getting.

So, what are we going to do? Right now, in the short term, absolutely nothing to prevent this mess or make it less painful. We’ll have to wait until after it is clear who won the Presidential Election to see if anything will be done to reduce the severity. Until then, the current administration has made it very clear that they will only make those changes that will put off the coming financial disaster until after the inauguration in January.

What do we need to do? To some extent, we’re going to have to prepare ourselves for what is likely to be a huge financial disaster. I’m guessing that in the next 18 months we may actually be in an Honest to God Depression, unless there are some major changes in this country. With almost no source of capital in this economy I do not see any way to avoid some kind of economic disaster. There are changes that can be made to change course and make this a Recession instead, but these are huge changes and I’m not certain if there is the political will in Washington to do this. Here’s what I see as being the best course of actions:

Reduce the pool of job applicants. We can’t keep paying people less and expect them to buy more. It simply won’t work. There are many ways to reduce the applicant pool, including:

1. Eliminating the H1-b visa. We need to pay our best educated citizens better now. The H1-b visa is used by corporations to pay less than the going rate for well-educated people, not to fill vacancies that can’t be filled. It’s a total scam for corporations.

2. Kick illegal immigrants out of the country and keep them from coming back unless they want to play by the rules. Stop talking about amnesty. There should be no advantage to those who are here illegally over those who didn’t. Border defense is not in vogue in Washington right now, but it better come back into fashion quickly. After all, illegal immigrants don’t vote (at least, they aren’t supposed to.) And don’t tell me I’m anti-immigrant. If you overstayed your visa and didn’t follow any of the accepted methods for staying here legally, or entered this country without documentation of any kind, you’ve broken the law. If you still don’t understand that, I’m not going to waste time explaining it to you. Perhaps if we redefined these people as job-thieves we could get this message across better.

3. Decreasing college tuition costs and college textbook costs, or alternately, reducing interest rates on college loans. Increasing the number of students will reduce the number of people applying for jobs, while training our work force better, making this a two-fer. A better trained workforce is a greater asset to our corporations, and to our country as a whole.

4. Increase the pay and benefits for enlisted personnel in the Armed Services. We need more people in the armed forces right now, so let’s make it more attractive to young people to join. Besides, we ask these people to do a darn tough job and risk their lives doing it; we should pay them in accordance.

5. Give wage earners a large tax deduction for a stay-at-home parent, enough to cover their potentially lost wages. Having a parent stay at home to raise children will help them to be better students and more stabile adults. This is my favorite family value.

The non-exclusive alternative to decreasing the applicant pool is to start actually backing Labor Unions, and also expecting the heads of those unions to act like the leaders of labor unions. I remember when I was a kid a strike by a labor union could bring the whole country to its knees. The Teamsters strike and the Hotel Workers strike come to mind immediately. These days, it barely makes the local news, unless it’s the Writer’s Union, which means we’re just going to watch more UnReality TV. It’s time for Labor Unions to stop being defensive, and start actually recruiting members and expanding their reach.

Immediately increase government revenue. Sorry, this means tax hikes. There is no way around it. If you continue to spend more than you are taking in, eventually you will either have to pay it back or file for bankruptcy. This is the basis for Fiscal Responsibility, something the Republicans used to claim as their own. In fact, the Republicans in power for most of the last 10 years have been doing their best to ignore this fact. You can’t ignore it much longer. We can’t simply pull out of Iraq, unless you want a huge mess in the Middle East, so we’re committed there. We have to start paying for it, and that means the rich are finally going to start paying their fair share. I strongly recommend:

1. Restructuring the Alternative Minimum Tax so that it affects only those people making at least $150,000 yearly as the first step, and I’m not counting phantom bonuses from short-selling a home, I mean actual income that can be used to buy things or invest.

2. Bringing back the Death Benefit tax as it was would also be a good step.

3. We absolutely will have to increase corporate taxes, even with their effects on consumer prices. That is simply unavoidable if we want to keep interest rates in check while stimulating the economy. The best and most important way would involve eliminating the tax advantage of offshoring Corporate Headquarters to tax haven countries such as the Caymen Islands. We also need to remove tax advantages of offshoring American jobs. This never made sense to me.

Fix and improve the national infrastructure. Our Highways are not in great shape. Our electrical grid is in even worse shape. Airports are clogged chronically. If we don’t tackle these problems now we limit our ability to climb out of an economic problem, regardless of the severity.

Invest in new technologies. We haven’t made this as a priority in years in this country. I don’t just mean on the Government level or just the corporate level. I mean both. We need to increase our Government spending on basic research. This is the kind of research that may not pay off for decades, but eventually could lead to a big payoff. It’s the kind of research that no corporation is likely to invest in. But to stay competitive, we need to increase spending in research that is likely to pay off soon. The best way to do this is through corporate grants or corporate sponsored research centers. Giving corporations tax breaks for doing research makes much more sense to me than giving them money to figure out new ways to send American jobs overseas.

Fix the problem with people’s credit after foreclosure. I’m not sure how this should be done. If I were in Congress, I would be asking the three credit reporting bureaus, TransUnion, Experion, and Equifax, to remove foreclosures from a person’s credit history after a much shorter period of time automatically, especially if that is there only major problem. In addition, I would ask them to remove it if an adequate reason for the foreclosure could be given, such as a ridiculously high foreclosure rate in the same area, or the closing of a major factory. Giving millions of people a 10 year time-out from participating in the economy isn’t going to help anyone if in fact they can buy things and stimulate the economy. If the credit reporting agencies aren’t willing to do this, legislation may be in order.

It’s clear that the next several years are going to be difficult. We’re just now starting to wake up from one heck of a party, and the hangover is going to be huge. Unfortunately there is no one solution to a problem this vast. These suggestions are just my ideas after analyzing this vast economic situation. I’m sure I haven’t covered everything, and would love to hear your ideas, anecdotes, or analysis of what is happening. Please feel free to comment.

*Addendum 3/1/2008-There has been an interesting news article posted at Yahoo News about an activist group in Cleveland that is taking on predatory lenders.

Folks on Humphrey Hill Drive were still waking up on the icy Saturday morning the shark hunters came to town. They rounded the suburban traffic circle in a pair of rented school buses after a half-hour ride from far more modest neighborhoods, rumbling to a stop at the Garmone family's driveway. Forty-two caffeinated Clevelanders piled out, their leaders carrying bullhorns.

Their quarry, Mike Garmone — a regional vice president at Countrywide Financial Corp., the nation's largest mortgage lender — didn't answer his door. So they deployed, ringing bells at the big homes with three-car garages, handing out accusatory fliers and lambasting Garmone and his company's loans. Before departing, they left their calling card — thousands of 2 1/2-inch plastic sharks — flung across Garmone's frozen flower beds, up into the gutters, littering the doorstep.

The commotion was the work of an in-your-face activist group called the East Side Organizing Project, with a paid staff then of just two, mobilized to battle Cleveland's mortgage "loan sharks." Years before the rest of the country was rocked by the fallout from aggressive lending, their neighborhoods were already home to the nation's highest concentration of foreclosures — and they were fed up.

This is the kind of activity that may be needed to wake up lenders. You can't foreclose on millions of homes in the U.S. without affecting the economy-and your own bottom line. Either they will begin to understand this, or like Countrywide, they'll have to merge with stronger lenders, or just go out of business.

You can find the whole article at Yahoo News.

* Addendum -3/3/2008, 1:15 AM - Two interesting articles over at Yahoo this evening.

The first one is about the financial literacy of the average American-or lack thereof.

Americans don't understand debt, which may be one reason that they have too much of it, according to a survey released Tuesday.

The survey presented 1,000 people with a hypothetical scenario about credit card debt and asked them to compute how long it would take to pay it off. Only 35.9% of the 1,000 respondents could figure out how many years it would take for the amount they owe on their credit cards to double.

Full article over at Yahoo Personal Finance.

The other article is how Asian markets are tanking on fears of an American Recession.

Most Asian markets tumbled Monday as investors reacted nervously to a steep decline on Wall Street Friday after disappointing economic and corporate news reawakened worries about a U.S. recession.

Japan's benchmark Nikkei 225 index plunged 4.5 percent to close at 12,992.18. Markets in Hong Kong, South Korea, India and Australia also fell sharply. However, shares in mainland China advanced.

Full article over at Yahoo News.

Why are we copying the LOSERS of the 20th Century?

By Ed Smallwood

I originally posted this on my MySpace page. I have changed it since then because I thought of something else to add to it. - Revised 2-28-2008

One of the nice things about having a blog is that sometimes you can put the entire first paragraph of an essay in the headline. Like the one above. However, having made a statement as strong as that one, I need to defend it.

In the 20^th Century there were 2 entities that really lost. Nazi Germany, and the Warsaw Pact nations under the Soviet Union. Nazi Germany lost World War II, and the Warsaw Pact lost the Cold War, and they both lost in a big way.

What bothers me at this point is how it appears that the United States, instead of using its own actions in those events as a basis for moving forward, seems to be doing it’s level best to copy the losers.

Nazi Germany attempted to use lightning-fast battle techniques (“Blitzkrieg”) and superior arms to bring Europe to its knees. It ended up outrunning its supply lines and getting bogged down in multiple countries in direct conflict and terrorist attacks from insurgents until other countries could rally and defeat them. The United States used lighting-fast battle techniques (“Shock and Awe”) and superior arms to bring Afghanistan and Iraq to their knees. We’ve gotten bogged down in both countries due to insurgent attacks and can’t keep our equipment going or enlist enough soldiers to keep the fight going.

The Warsaw Pact couldn’t keep people in East Germany from defecting to the West, so they built a wall separating East Germany from West Germany, sucking resources and making it more expensive for people to flee East Germany. The United States is seriously considering building a wall across the southern border of our country to keep people from coming in illegally, mostly making it more expensive and dangerous for people to go under the border and sucking resources that could be better spent in other areas.

East Germany didn’t trust its own people, so they decided to wiretap and spy on people they suspected of being “unpatriotic” without court orders and without oversight. Our Government, in order to “protect us from terrorists” has been wiretapping people without court orders and without oversight. In fact, the administration still won’t tell us who was wiretapped, what was so important that it had to be wiretapped, or allowed either of the two other branches of government oversee what was done. They claim that the only phone conversations overheard or recorded had at least one end out of the country, but won’t produce any evidence of this. They claim that this information would be dangerous for anyone but them to know. They also claim that the FISA court, specifically devised to oversee this kind of wiretapping, moves too slow and is out of date for what they needed, even though they can get a warrant up to 72 hours after recording a phone conversation, and that the FISA laws were amended numerous times at their insistence after 9/11.

I’m going to give you the reality of the situations that nobody in Washington wants to face. Getting out of Iraq is going to involve more than just taking our soldiers out or putting more in. We screwed it up; we need to help fix it. This means we need to get the various factions talking. This is going to be hard, but throwing more soldiers at this problem won’t fix it. Taking them out won’t fix it either. The kind of destabilization in Iraq that would come from us leaving would likely spread across the region, which could be very bad for everyone.

With illegal immigration across our southern border, we need to start talking with Mexico. Currently they are helping their people to jump across the border. That needs to stop. In addition we need to help take away some of the need to come here. The best way of doing that is to help Mexico become more than the third-world country it currently is. Less corruption, better working conditions, better law enforcement, higher wages, less unemployment. All of these are necessary in order to reduce the influx from down south. A wall will do none of these things. The other illegal immigration problem that we have, the potentially bigger problem, is with people overstaying their visas. This is especially a big problem with H1-b visas. Building a wall will have no effect on this kind of illegal immigrant. We need better monitoring of people who are already here. It would also be a good idea to eliminate the H1-b visa program. The entire aim of this program is to dilute the job pool for educated workers, and bring down salaries for these people already in this country. This really benefits nobody but the heads of the businesses using them, and even that is debatable.

We also have no idea what was really done in the case of the illegal wiretapping. We don’t know who was wiretapped, why, or what was done with the information. We actually don’t know if the administration was wiretapping the Democrats in phone conversations that were held completely within the United States or its territories, and considering their past, I would believe this was almost certainly the case. Democracy is not served, ever, by keeping this kind of information secret, or by preventing oversight from the other branches of government. There is no doubt that crimes were committed with these wiretaps. It was absolutely against the law when it happened. Any attempts to make it retroactively legal should not be allowed. Emulating the Warsaw Pact is not in our best interest.

It is much easier to fight or build walls than talk or stop criminal activity by our Executive Branch, but if we really want to solve these problems that is exactly what we are going to have to do. That, or follow the Nazis and Soviets into failure, and possibly obscurity.