Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Breakthru in strawberry breeding
Bought a box of California strawberries at Wal Mart yesterday, 'cause they were on sale and bright red. It was the usual batch of gigantic berries, each on the size of a lemon. But, surprise, for the first time, the monster berries were actually sweet, and had a bit of real strawberry taste to them. Usually the mega berries are flat and tasteless. Some one must have come up with a strain of monster sized berries that actually taste good, as well as being easier to pick.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Ham and Potato Chowder
New recipe. Very Tasty. Easy too.
2-3 potatoes
2 carrots
2 chicken bouillon cubes
1/2 teaspoon thyme
1/2 teaspoon tarragon
3 oz (or more) cooked ham
1 can corn
3 cups milk
2 strips bacon
1 onion
jigger of white wine.
Peel veggies. Cut potatoes into cubes, slice carrots, chop onions. Cut bacon into short pieces and cook until crisp on the bottom of a large soup pot. Saute the chopped onion in the bacon grease. When tender, drain off the bacon grease into that grease can everyone has near the stove. Add cubed potatoes and carrots. Add just enough water to cover. Bring to a boil and then back off the heat to gently cook the veggies. Add the bouillon cubes, wine, thyme, and tarragon. Cook on modest heat until the carrots begin to be tender. About 20 minutes. Add ham, corn, and milk. Continue heating until piping hot. Say another ten minutes. Try not the boil the milk, boiling will make it taste funny.
Recipe is flexible and can be expanded as required. Makes enough to feed one grown up and one hungry college age son. Would feed three or four grown ups. To make more for cheap, increase the potatoes. One potato per person is a good starting point.
2-3 potatoes
2 carrots
2 chicken bouillon cubes
1/2 teaspoon thyme
1/2 teaspoon tarragon
3 oz (or more) cooked ham
1 can corn
3 cups milk
2 strips bacon
1 onion
jigger of white wine.
Peel veggies. Cut potatoes into cubes, slice carrots, chop onions. Cut bacon into short pieces and cook until crisp on the bottom of a large soup pot. Saute the chopped onion in the bacon grease. When tender, drain off the bacon grease into that grease can everyone has near the stove. Add cubed potatoes and carrots. Add just enough water to cover. Bring to a boil and then back off the heat to gently cook the veggies. Add the bouillon cubes, wine, thyme, and tarragon. Cook on modest heat until the carrots begin to be tender. About 20 minutes. Add ham, corn, and milk. Continue heating until piping hot. Say another ten minutes. Try not the boil the milk, boiling will make it taste funny.
Recipe is flexible and can be expanded as required. Makes enough to feed one grown up and one hungry college age son. Would feed three or four grown ups. To make more for cheap, increase the potatoes. One potato per person is a good starting point.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Empathy, in Supreme Court Judges
Obama wants judges with "empathy". Which is about the same as "sympathy". Presumably Obama is looking for judges who will render decisions in favor of the poor, the down trodden, the individual, and give the back of the hand to corporations. In favor of personal injury, asbestos and malpractice plaintiffs over companies and doctors.
Not sure I like this. There are two parties to lawsuits. I want judges to decide fairly between the two parties in accordance with the law, not decide that one plaintiff deserves to win 'cause he is so adorable and sympathetic.
Recent malpractice case decided empathetically by the current Supremes. The plaintiff suffered terrible injuries from improper administration of a powerful drug. The court socked it to the drug manufacturer. The court decided the warning on the bottle label wasn't strong enough, even though the label had been approved by FDA. The decided to take money from an innocent party to compensate the sympathetic victim. Which raises the price of drugs and health care for all of us. Court decisions like this cause health care to eat up 16% of GNP. They could have ruled the medical personnel liable for improper administration of the drug, but the medics don't have enough money to be worth suing.
Not sure I like this. There are two parties to lawsuits. I want judges to decide fairly between the two parties in accordance with the law, not decide that one plaintiff deserves to win 'cause he is so adorable and sympathetic.
Recent malpractice case decided empathetically by the current Supremes. The plaintiff suffered terrible injuries from improper administration of a powerful drug. The court socked it to the drug manufacturer. The court decided the warning on the bottle label wasn't strong enough, even though the label had been approved by FDA. The decided to take money from an innocent party to compensate the sympathetic victim. Which raises the price of drugs and health care for all of us. Court decisions like this cause health care to eat up 16% of GNP. They could have ruled the medical personnel liable for improper administration of the drug, but the medics don't have enough money to be worth suing.
The road ahead
Between Bush's $750 billion TARP and Obama's $787 billion porkulus bill, the credit of the United States has been pretty well used up. The government won't be able to do another big spend, the money is gone and it won't be able to borrow that much more.
Too bad that neither seem to have helped the real economy. The real economy is 70% consumer spending. Until consumers stop worrying about getting laid off, they aren't going to spend on anything except groceries. The car companies are in the tank because car sales dropped from 17 million new cars per year to 10 million new cars per year. Why the drop? Simple. People worried about loosing their jobs don't buy new cars.
With the economy in the tank, require new cars to get 35.5 mile per gallon. That's are real sales killer, pay more for smaller cars.
With the economy in the tank, increase the amount of money going to health care. right now 16% of GNP goes to health care. Offering free health insurance to everyone will jack that up. Health care costs slow the economy, they don't grow it.
With the economy in the tank, propose a giant fuel tax, aka cap and trade. That ought to cut another whacking big slice off the GNP.
The future don't look good. And Obama is making it worse.
Too bad that neither seem to have helped the real economy. The real economy is 70% consumer spending. Until consumers stop worrying about getting laid off, they aren't going to spend on anything except groceries. The car companies are in the tank because car sales dropped from 17 million new cars per year to 10 million new cars per year. Why the drop? Simple. People worried about loosing their jobs don't buy new cars.
With the economy in the tank, require new cars to get 35.5 mile per gallon. That's are real sales killer, pay more for smaller cars.
With the economy in the tank, increase the amount of money going to health care. right now 16% of GNP goes to health care. Offering free health insurance to everyone will jack that up. Health care costs slow the economy, they don't grow it.
With the economy in the tank, propose a giant fuel tax, aka cap and trade. That ought to cut another whacking big slice off the GNP.
The future don't look good. And Obama is making it worse.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Welfare for Watermeters
Just got a letter from my water board about meters. Up 'til last year, nobody had a water meter in this town. There are so many weekend houses that use very little water to matter. Billing was done by dividing the revenues needed to keep the water on by the number of customers. Which makes sense, the water flows out of the wells for free. The cost comes from laying and maintaining all those pesky pipes. The pipe costs the same whether water runs thru it or not. Billing based on metered usage would let all the weekend homes off free, and make the full time residents pay all the bills. The water board is all full time residents so that wasn't going to happen.
Turns out the staties and the feds are in love with water meters. Unless we installed meters thru out the town, they wouldn't lend the town money to replace that pipe. The pipe in question was laid back in the 1930's, and replacement is not unreasonable after all this time. Between increased demand and increased leakage, water pressure in town was getting too low to meet state standards. If water pressure drops below zero, the system starts sucking water back in thru all the leaks, and back out of any improperly plumbed drains, which is a health hazard. The state has been on the town's back to fix this for several years now.
So, in order to get a $3.5 million loan at 2.75%, the town had to blow $750,000 installing water meters in every house. I should buy stock in a water meter company.
The letter from the water board then explained that billing would be done the traditional way, $200 a house, pretty much irregardless of meter readings. I'm so glad we paid for all those meters.
Turns out the staties and the feds are in love with water meters. Unless we installed meters thru out the town, they wouldn't lend the town money to replace that pipe. The pipe in question was laid back in the 1930's, and replacement is not unreasonable after all this time. Between increased demand and increased leakage, water pressure in town was getting too low to meet state standards. If water pressure drops below zero, the system starts sucking water back in thru all the leaks, and back out of any improperly plumbed drains, which is a health hazard. The state has been on the town's back to fix this for several years now.
So, in order to get a $3.5 million loan at 2.75%, the town had to blow $750,000 installing water meters in every house. I should buy stock in a water meter company.
The letter from the water board then explained that billing would be done the traditional way, $200 a house, pretty much irregardless of meter readings. I'm so glad we paid for all those meters.
Agincourt by Juliet Barker
Some light reading for a rainy day. Agincourt was the third major battle of the 100 years war where at Henry V of England inflicted the third crushing defeat upon the French. An English army of perhaps 7000 men slaughtered a vastly larger French army in hand to hand fighting. This all took place nearly 600 years ago (1415 to be precise).
The author read the surprising large amount of documentation that has come down to us. It's mostly English, the French revolution destroyed much of the French records. There are enlistment papers, army payrolls, bills to suppliers of arrows and ships and victuals. We have the names of the ordinary soldiers. The author remarks that most Englishmen bore ordinary names like Tom Dick and Harry whereas many French casualties bore names from Arthurian legend, Lancelot, Gawaine, Tristram.
Out of all this material the author spins a well documented, highly readable and fascinating look at the late middle ages.
Interestingly, Juliet Barker's account matches extremely closely with John Keegan's account of the same battle written back in 1976. Keegan, being a military historian (Juliet Barker is a general historian) concentrates on the issue of HOW the much smaller English army inflicted such a smashing defeat upon a vastly superior enemy. Mrs Barker instead offers a never ending stream of fascinating details, of costume, of finance, of recruiting practices, shipping, the taking and ransoming of prisoners, and the massive victory parade in London after the victory.
I enjoyed it.
The author read the surprising large amount of documentation that has come down to us. It's mostly English, the French revolution destroyed much of the French records. There are enlistment papers, army payrolls, bills to suppliers of arrows and ships and victuals. We have the names of the ordinary soldiers. The author remarks that most Englishmen bore ordinary names like Tom Dick and Harry whereas many French casualties bore names from Arthurian legend, Lancelot, Gawaine, Tristram.
Out of all this material the author spins a well documented, highly readable and fascinating look at the late middle ages.
Interestingly, Juliet Barker's account matches extremely closely with John Keegan's account of the same battle written back in 1976. Keegan, being a military historian (Juliet Barker is a general historian) concentrates on the issue of HOW the much smaller English army inflicted such a smashing defeat upon a vastly superior enemy. Mrs Barker instead offers a never ending stream of fascinating details, of costume, of finance, of recruiting practices, shipping, the taking and ransoming of prisoners, and the massive victory parade in London after the victory.
I enjoyed it.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Obama-Cheney TV speeches
Obama was first on Fox. He spoke at length about closing Gitmo, and how opening Gitmo was a mistake (that he is correcting). He went on to talk about torture, CIA, and some other stuff. For a change, Obama say one thing of real substance. He plans to move the Gitmo prisoners to US "super max" prisons. He claimed that no one has ever escaped from such a prison. We will ignore the urban legends about the guy who escaped from Alcatraz. Actually, the risk is not escape, but some judge turning them loose.
Obama seems to understand the need to hold Al Quada fighters in jail, even though they aren't guilty of crimes. Other than bearing arms against the United States, they haven't done anything that would convince any kind of American court of their guilt. If they were wearing uniforms and soldiering for a real government, they would be prisoners of war. As it is, we need to hold them for the same reasons we hold prisoners of war, but we don't feel like granting them the privileges associated with POW status. Such as freedom from interrogation and Red Cross packages.
Then it was Cheney's turn. He spoke at length and ably defended the Bush Adminstration's war on terror. He made a lot of sense, and it's too bad Bush didn't say these things back when he was president. When Cheney speaks, he speaks about facts, rather than Obama's style of standing fore square for motherhood and apple pie.
Obama seems to understand the need to hold Al Quada fighters in jail, even though they aren't guilty of crimes. Other than bearing arms against the United States, they haven't done anything that would convince any kind of American court of their guilt. If they were wearing uniforms and soldiering for a real government, they would be prisoners of war. As it is, we need to hold them for the same reasons we hold prisoners of war, but we don't feel like granting them the privileges associated with POW status. Such as freedom from interrogation and Red Cross packages.
Then it was Cheney's turn. He spoke at length and ably defended the Bush Adminstration's war on terror. He made a lot of sense, and it's too bad Bush didn't say these things back when he was president. When Cheney speaks, he speaks about facts, rather than Obama's style of standing fore square for motherhood and apple pie.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)