I would like to talk a little bit about the GM UAW strike that went on today. At 11:00 a.m. this morning, 73,000 UAW workers went on strike because both parties (Management and the Union) could not come to terms on several key issues. Their contract had originally ended on the 14th but after 9 days of not seeing eye to eye, the Union decided to pull out the big guns and coordinate a strike. CNN has an article discussing the most current events.
This particular issue really chaps my you know what!! The main reason both parties cannot come to terms is the incurred health care costs. GM wants to shift 51 Billion in future health care costs for retirees and current work force. Between the two, there is a little over 340,000. Now I work for a municipality, the City has several Unions, and believe me, the weekly cost for a worker on the average family plan pays about $15.00 a week. I am willing to bet that the GM workers are paying very similar cost if not less! The thing that gets my goat is that these workers have no idea what millions of other working americans are paying for their health care.
I went on to the National Coalition of Health Care to get some figures on what people are paying for Health care.
"Premiums for employer-based health insurance rose by 7.7 percent in 2006. Small employers saw their premiums, on average, increase 8.8 percent. Firms with less than 24 workers, experienced an increase of 10.5 percent (3)
The annual premium that a health insurer charges an employer for a health plan covering a family of four averaged $11,500 in 2006. Workers contributed nearly $3,000, or 10 percent more than they did in 2005 (3).The annual premiums for family coverage significantly eclipsed the gross earnings for a full-time, minimum-wage worker ($10,712)".
If that employer covers 80% of what the insurance company charges (My brother is in a similar situation) then the cost for the coverage is for the employee to pay. 80% of $11,500 is $9,200, leaving $2,300 for the employee which comes out to be a little over $44.00 a week! That is 3 times what the Union worker pays. Does the UAW Union think that increased health care costs are a myth? Do they honestly think that there workers are exempt from these cost that the rest of the country is dealing with? It is just frustrating to read stuff like this because unfortunatley it comes down to money, and in the long run, the consumer of a GM product will pay for it anyway!
This concludes my rant of the week!
Monday, September 24, 2007
Monday, September 17, 2007
Landfills and Global Warming (YES, Believe it!)
I know that we talked about global warming a little bit last week, this is the latest MSW magazine and they have a crazy article on Landfills impact on global warming. The article was extremely long and very involved with a lot of studies, charts and graphs, but I will try to explain it so you can understand.
As awareness regarding the potential threat of climate change has grown in the US, many local governments and businesses are being asked to consider implications of their actions, and believe it or not, the trash we throw away has a major potential impact in climate change. The major types of Green House Gases (GHGs) that are introduced into the atmosphere by human activity are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydroflourocarbons, and a variety of others. Carbon Dioxide and Methane taking up about 80% of all generated and the 20% that is left is a medley of about 20-25 other gases.
In the article, there is a section that breaksdown how the CO2 and Methane are created, they call this section Carbon Accounting and the Carbon Footprint. In the Solid Waste World, CO2 and CH4 go hand in hand. In 2003, The EPA reported that the US generated 236 tons of trash! That is approximately 4.5 lbs per person PER DAY! That trash then has three different destinies. One, it goes to a landfill, in the report, they go so far as how much emissions one would produce a year if it was collected by a trash hauler or it was brought to a transfer station. When trash ends up in a landfill, it then starts the bio process, that means that it is going to breakdown. Little bugs and vectors and microscopics are going to start eating, and when they eat (with a little moisture) they accumulate. With all that eating and accumulation the bye product of this is gases, and 80% of them are GHGs. The second destiny is incineration! Guess what, the emissions from that is almost all Carbon Dioxide, 90% to be exact, the rest is a medly of other gases and particulates. Third and final and least impact is baling. This takes the trash and pacts it into vacuum tight and sealed bales. Shelf life can be, well they are not sure to be exact, but they produce very little GHGs. They do interupt the cycle of life and the food chain. They also take up a lot of space that will never really breakdown. This practice is very popular in Europe.
To wrap this article up, it states Methane has a more powerful greenhouse effect than CO2, and that the way Americans handle their trash accounts for 25% of the United States Methane emissions! I could not see the proof in the article, but it states that one ton of methane is estimated by the scientific community to make the same contribution to global warming as 23 tons of Carbon Dioxide. Americans are the most materialistic country in the world. We want everything and we want it new, so when the crap we get can be replaced a few years from now. And on top of that we are crazy eaters. Advertisements are coming from all directions and encourages us to consume, and consume we do. But what can we do about our trash? I guarentee everyone that read this blogg had no idea our own trash is a major player in the effects of global warming! Reduce, Reuse and Recycle, is still not enough at this point, but it is a start!
As awareness regarding the potential threat of climate change has grown in the US, many local governments and businesses are being asked to consider implications of their actions, and believe it or not, the trash we throw away has a major potential impact in climate change. The major types of Green House Gases (GHGs) that are introduced into the atmosphere by human activity are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydroflourocarbons, and a variety of others. Carbon Dioxide and Methane taking up about 80% of all generated and the 20% that is left is a medley of about 20-25 other gases.
In the article, there is a section that breaksdown how the CO2 and Methane are created, they call this section Carbon Accounting and the Carbon Footprint. In the Solid Waste World, CO2 and CH4 go hand in hand. In 2003, The EPA reported that the US generated 236 tons of trash! That is approximately 4.5 lbs per person PER DAY! That trash then has three different destinies. One, it goes to a landfill, in the report, they go so far as how much emissions one would produce a year if it was collected by a trash hauler or it was brought to a transfer station. When trash ends up in a landfill, it then starts the bio process, that means that it is going to breakdown. Little bugs and vectors and microscopics are going to start eating, and when they eat (with a little moisture) they accumulate. With all that eating and accumulation the bye product of this is gases, and 80% of them are GHGs. The second destiny is incineration! Guess what, the emissions from that is almost all Carbon Dioxide, 90% to be exact, the rest is a medly of other gases and particulates. Third and final and least impact is baling. This takes the trash and pacts it into vacuum tight and sealed bales. Shelf life can be, well they are not sure to be exact, but they produce very little GHGs. They do interupt the cycle of life and the food chain. They also take up a lot of space that will never really breakdown. This practice is very popular in Europe.
To wrap this article up, it states Methane has a more powerful greenhouse effect than CO2, and that the way Americans handle their trash accounts for 25% of the United States Methane emissions! I could not see the proof in the article, but it states that one ton of methane is estimated by the scientific community to make the same contribution to global warming as 23 tons of Carbon Dioxide. Americans are the most materialistic country in the world. We want everything and we want it new, so when the crap we get can be replaced a few years from now. And on top of that we are crazy eaters. Advertisements are coming from all directions and encourages us to consume, and consume we do. But what can we do about our trash? I guarentee everyone that read this blogg had no idea our own trash is a major player in the effects of global warming! Reduce, Reuse and Recycle, is still not enough at this point, but it is a start!
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Nashua Election
After reading the assignment on "Religious voting and the Kennedy Election" I was intrigued on how this formula actually worked out in his favor even though he lost about 4.3 million voters for just being Catholic. It is amazing to me that there was actually a statistical analysis done on this topic.
On September 11, 2007. The City of Nashua held a primary election for six potential candidates. The two top picks got 36% and 30% of the total votes and will be the two running against each other in the November 6, 2007 election. Both Candidates have great values and can bring a lot to Nashua.
Last week, five days before the election, the local paper had on the front page, in big, very noticeable pictures, three of the candidates running for Mayor. The bold lettering stated that these three candidates have claimed bankruptcy, how can you expect them to run a $220 million dollar City when they can't even run there own financial lives? This was a political dagger to several of the candidates. They were very upset about the article because it happened many years ago and it was not there fault. They were even more adamant about the article after the election, basically blaming the paper for there primary election woes.
In all honesty, I really thought one of the candidates was a shoe in for one of the two candidates (Ben can verify the conversation last week). But I will have to tell you that perception is reality! I read the article last week and could not believe this respected candidate could be in this situation. Then I started to think about the basic facts. The Mayor of a City is, quite simply, a CEO of a major corporation, if a CEO is under performing, then they are let go, it is a little more difficult to just let go a Mayor. I started to have my doubts and then convinced myself that it was going to be very difficult for this candidate to win, and if I was thinking this, than I am sure others felt this way after the article. To think about the ramifications of the whole thing is amazing!
It would be a very interesting study to see the before and after results of this article. Just like in the Kennedy election, he lost votes but still one because of the electoral college. It should be a before and after, to see the candidates on top one day, and are down in the gutter the next. The effect it has on the whole politcal arena, whether it is being Catholic or claiming Chapter 11, something negatively focused had a cause and effect. Better yet, a study on media intervention and candidacy success would be interesting as well.
On September 11, 2007. The City of Nashua held a primary election for six potential candidates. The two top picks got 36% and 30% of the total votes and will be the two running against each other in the November 6, 2007 election. Both Candidates have great values and can bring a lot to Nashua.
Last week, five days before the election, the local paper had on the front page, in big, very noticeable pictures, three of the candidates running for Mayor. The bold lettering stated that these three candidates have claimed bankruptcy, how can you expect them to run a $220 million dollar City when they can't even run there own financial lives? This was a political dagger to several of the candidates. They were very upset about the article because it happened many years ago and it was not there fault. They were even more adamant about the article after the election, basically blaming the paper for there primary election woes.
In all honesty, I really thought one of the candidates was a shoe in for one of the two candidates (Ben can verify the conversation last week). But I will have to tell you that perception is reality! I read the article last week and could not believe this respected candidate could be in this situation. Then I started to think about the basic facts. The Mayor of a City is, quite simply, a CEO of a major corporation, if a CEO is under performing, then they are let go, it is a little more difficult to just let go a Mayor. I started to have my doubts and then convinced myself that it was going to be very difficult for this candidate to win, and if I was thinking this, than I am sure others felt this way after the article. To think about the ramifications of the whole thing is amazing!
It would be a very interesting study to see the before and after results of this article. Just like in the Kennedy election, he lost votes but still one because of the electoral college. It should be a before and after, to see the candidates on top one day, and are down in the gutter the next. The effect it has on the whole politcal arena, whether it is being Catholic or claiming Chapter 11, something negatively focused had a cause and effect. Better yet, a study on media intervention and candidacy success would be interesting as well.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Blog # 1
As I sit here and ponder as to what I should focus my paper on for this class, I realize that I should do it on something work related. By doing this, I will get work done for my class and I can use this information to better suit the operational needs of my Department. I work for the City of Nashua Solid Waste Department (the Landfill). There is so much information related to my area of expertise that it would make your head spin! From Landfill operations, gas emissions, collections, recycling, maintenance, yard waste so on and so forth. If it is in the realm of the Solid Waste industry, you can bet that there is some sort of study done on it. When Professor Chavda mentioned "bad stats" I immediately thought of my Department. Studies have changed and or effected almost everything in the environmental field. To make a long story short, my department tried a "new type" of operation that was based on studies done and when it was actually up and running in the field of operation, it was a big bust, especially for the first winter. We basically had to go back to the "old ways", we wasted time and money on something that was supposed to work. When we investigated as to how this bust happened, we concluded cold weather was never taken into effect seeing that all the studies were done in the Southeastern and Southwestern States, never once was it mentioned that the cold could play a role in the study, but if you looked at it on paper, it was a no brainer to try and implement this system based on the numbers.
I think that I am going to base my research paper on Recycling. Something that is the hot topic in the Recycling field, especially Construction and Demolition (C+D) or Electronics. For the State of New Hampshire, these materials primarily have been land filled, recently, the State has put a Ban on all monitor display devices and currently has in Legislation a permanent Ban on C+D. I am not sure the focus of the project, whether it should be based on national studies or state and local. I will do more research to make my decision.
Well I hope I did not bore anyone to tears on my first blog. Take care.
I think that I am going to base my research paper on Recycling. Something that is the hot topic in the Recycling field, especially Construction and Demolition (C+D) or Electronics. For the State of New Hampshire, these materials primarily have been land filled, recently, the State has put a Ban on all monitor display devices and currently has in Legislation a permanent Ban on C+D. I am not sure the focus of the project, whether it should be based on national studies or state and local. I will do more research to make my decision.
Well I hope I did not bore anyone to tears on my first blog. Take care.
Sunday, September 9, 2007
test
This is a test of the Polt 905 statistical blogging committee, this is only a test. BEEEEEEEEEP!!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)