Federal deficit. The undertable tax

The federal deficit is easy to understand.  The feds have a lot of expenses, paying the bureaucrats, paying the troops, paying social security, paying medicare, paying for the armed forces, and on and on.  Last year outgo was like $15 trillion.  Income from taxes was a lot less.  Say $12 trillion.  To keep the checks from bouncing, Uncle Sam borrowed $3 trillion.   
   Actually, Uncle doesn't borrow the money, he prints it.  Works like this.  Uncle sells US Treasury bonds (soundest investment on the planet).  Bond buyers give Uncle money in exchange for bonds.  Thing is, T-bills are near as good as money.  Granted bonds aren't accepted down at Walmart, but, the bondholder can turn bonds into cash with a simple phone call to his broker.  There is a market, open every business day, and a sell (or buy) goes thru within hours.  So, a man with a big wad of T-bills in his safe deposit box feels as wealthy as a man with the same amount of cash.  My college economics course called bonds "near money".  And printing near money is really the same thing as printing cash (real money). 
   So,  what's wrong with printing money?  As more and more money is printed, the value of the money goes down.  US money today is only worth 10% of what it was worth when I was a kid.  Gasoline used to be 28 cents a gallon.  It's nearly ten times that today.  Comic books used to be 10 cents.  Last time I bought a child a comic book it set me back $4.  Ice cream cones used to be 5 cents.  More like $2.50 this summer. 
   What this means, is anything saved over my life time is only worth a tenth of what it ought to be. 
 That's the undertable tax.  It nails us all. 
    And neither The Donald nor Hillary are talking about cutting the deficit.  Hillary is talking about increasing it a lot.  Vote for Trump.  Don't get fleeced. 

Detroit should be selling cars, not computers

Wall St Journal had a long article on the miraculous electronical features coming in new cars.  New cars might allow you to lock or unlock them with your phone.  Or schedule outrageously expensive service visits to your dealer, wave-your-hands controls to replace touch screens, rear view TV, and automatic remote controlled valet parking controlled by your phone, automatic driver wake up systems, and over-the-air software patches. 
   I don't want my new car to have any of this stuff.  If the car will unlock for my cell phone, it will unlock for car thief cell phones.  I never take my car to the dealer for service, the cost is outrageous.  I want real physical controls, that I can feel in the dark, not touchy feely screens or wave your hand in the air and something happens controls.   Rear view mirrors work all the time, TV camera's fail, especially after a fender bender.  I wouldn't dare allow a microprocessor to park my car, one screwup and I have a repair bill and a lawsuit. 
   Electronics, be they  car borne, pocketable, smart phone, Ipad, smartwatch, or plain old laptop, are only useful after a lot of loading of contact info, phone books, music,  email, programs, photographs, software, and whatever.  Once I have spent the time to load all this stuff into the electronic gizmo, I want to take it with me, into the client's office, into my office, into my home, to the beach, anywhere.  And electronic gizmos go obsolete faster than cars do.  Might want to get the latest gizmo without buying an entire new car.  And,  I'm not going to spend the time to load up a built-into-the-car system that I cannot take with me.
   The carmakers ought to come up with an industry wide electronic interface that would give a third party (Apple say) electronic gizmo access to the car speakers, antennas, and DC power.  And a stowage spot, a shelf under the dash, or a slot in the front seat console, or maybe a holder on the ceiling, up front, over the rear view mirror. 
   Last time I was on the road with youngest son and his Ipad,  interface with the car speakers was flaky.  All we had was a RF modulator that put the Ipad audio into the FM band, where the car FM radio picked it up and played it.  Had to keep fiddling with the RF modulator as we drove.  Ipad volume control was opaque, and song selection was worse. 

The Push Polls are running for Maggie

I've gotten two telephone push polls pushing Maggie Hassen this weekend.  Both poller's command of English was so poor that I had great difficulty understanding them.  Lots of luck Maggie.  If this is the best you can do, Kelly will beat you like a drum.

Will the Hillary-Donald presidential debate be worth watching???

I mean they both have said a lotta mean things about each other, what's left to say?  Can either of them present a substantive idea that makes any real sense, as opposed to promising pie in the sky?  Will the moderator try to help Hillary and bash Trump?   Watching presidential debates is like watching a bull fight.  You watch on the off chance to see a matador get gored.  Not that you wish the competitors any harm, but if blood flows you don't want to miss it. 

John Kasich supports TPP

Kasich did an op ed in the Wall St Journal yesterday.  He came out four square in support of TPP, saying that it would increase exports, create jobs, and reduce consumer prices.  All good stuff.  That's stuff I would like to believe. 
   Trouble is, Kasich said nothing about that TPP is.  Does it reduce other country tariffs against US exports?  How much? When?  What else does it regulate? 
   I am OK with a TPP that brings other country tariffs down to US levels.  US tariffs (except for sugar) are really really low.  That's why you see so many Japanese and South Korean cars on the road, and why pretty much everything on sale at Walmart is made in China.  Fair trade means other countries lower their tariff barriers to match ours. 
   And I am OK with a TPP that tries to lower "non tariff barriers",  hard to meet safety regulations , pollution limits,  and the like.
   I am not OK with lowering US tariffs any further.  I am not OK with using TPP to impose international minimum wages,  worker safety, and worker benefit laws.  Or to impose controls on money exchange rates.
Or other things that have nothing to do with tariffs.
   So far Obama has kept the contents of TPP secret.  It could have anything in it.  I am not in favor of ratifying a secret treaty that might well hurt us. 

Brits approve Hinkley Point nuclear plant

Back in July the new British government of Theresa May ordered a "review" of the project.  Back then, the "review" was seen as an indefinite delay.  Well, will wonders never cease?  Today the Wall St Journal announces that the Brits have given the project a go ahead.  The work will be done by Electricite de France, with financing by China General Nuclear Power Corp.
   The Brits have imposed some restrictions on the builders selling out their shares in the plant without Her Majesty's government approval.
   The announced price of $23.8 billion is way high.  You can put up a 1 Gigawatt nuclear plant for $4 to $5 billion in this country.  

Air Force bites off more than it can chew.

Or fund.  The big three money suckers.  The F35 fighter.  Cost is outta sight.  The software isn't finished.  The gun doesn't fire, the engines cannot take more than 5.6 G.  The KC-46 tanker project.   The Air Force managed to gold plate a simple "put tanks inside a well proven airliner" project into an ongoing boondoggle that is running late and over budget.  The new B-21 strategic bomber, this is going to be a somewhat smaller, and hopefully cheaper, version of the B2 bomber.  It's just getting started, but the project did make it thru a bid challenge by the loser[s]  (Boeing and Lockheed).  Aviation Week did not offer much in the way of cost estimates on the big three.  I'd guess $1 trillion over the next 10 years. 

And, after the top three projects, we have a four projects  in to the Request for Proposal, going out for bids, study project phase.  We have a new jet trainer to replace the capable but ageing T-38 Talon. A new ICBM to replace the Minuteman III.  The Long Range Standoff Missile to arm the new B21, and re arm the B-52, B1, B2 fleet.  A new helicopter for VIP transport. 

And even further out, an A10 replacement.  Which is hard to think about.  The existing A-10 is good at what it does.  It's a ground attack fighter that can fly low enough and slow enough for the pilot to see and hit his ground target.  Once the airplane can do that, it isn't fast enough to dogfight with mach 2 jet fighters.  The answer to this short coming is to provide fighter cover for the A-10s as needed.  Bombers have needed fighter escort ever since WWII.  

   The Air Force isn't going to be able to round up the funding to do all of this stuff at once.