Love the new EPA ruling on greenhouse gas emissions

Sunday, April 19, 2009 at 11:53 am (American politics, Green, Yawns, politics)

This past week the EPA formally declared 6 greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, to be pollutants.  This clears the way for needed regulation of their emissions, and I couldn’t be more pleased.

I’m nearly finished reading an excellent book on environmental policy by Steven Cohen, director of the environmental policy program at Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs, and I’ve got an improved understanding of the political issues involved in trying to fight global warming.  The global nature of the challenge really does present lots of new issues that policy-makers hadn’t dealt with before, but it finally seems that the amount of social learning in our American society has risen to the level we’ll need to begin to seriously tackle this problem.

Republicans are still clinging to the argument that it’s either environment or economy, and not both, but I think Americans are finally beginning to see past that.  With the advances in understanding and technology that we’ve made, particularly in the last two decades, we now see that not only is it not a one-to-one tradeoff between protecting the environment and growing the economy, but that we can use this immense challenge to grow our economy and our jobs.

Furthermore, continuing to ignore the environmental challenges that are rising poses significant threats to private enterprise and the global economy, and that should matter to Republicans too.  The article describes further threats to our infrastructure and public, threats that are large enough to interfere in our industry and impact our economy:

Among the ill effects of rising atmospheric concentrations of the gases, the agency found, were increased drought, more heavy downpours and flooding, more frequent and intense heat waves and wildfires, a steeper rise in sea levels and harm to water resources, agriculture, wildlife and ecosystems.

As our nation’s scientists and policy-makers lead the way in finding solutions to the problem, our workers, including unskilled, skilled, and knowledge-based, will have plenty of work to do.  And that is work that has to be done here and cannot be outsourced.  It involves working in our buildings, in our parks, and on our infrastructure.  It represents what can become a significant source of economic growth for the country and its communities, and it is the best way forward that I can see.

I am so glad that America is finally joining the rest of the industrialized world in a quest to tackle the 21st century challenge of global climate change.  And, as ever, I am proud to have Obama as our leader.

Leave a Comment

Saturday Readings & Viewings

Saturday, March 21, 2009 at 7:37 pm (American politics, Yawns, feminism, politics)
Tags: ,

I spent some time reading various articles on the internet today, and thought I’d share the interesting ones with my readers.

    Voting for Obama on the WFP Line

    Voting for Obama on the WFP Line

  • Lifestyles of the Rich and Infamous – Those AIG executives receiving bonuses whose names were leaked are receiving visitors – some organized by the CT Working Families Party.  Speaking of WFP – I am an e-active member of the NY Working Families Party – I even voted for Obama in the WFP column, as did nearly 160,000 other New Yorkers.
  • Fashion designers are having a tough time figuring out what fashions to push during these tough economic times. Some have tried looks reminiscent of the Great Depression, but that didn’t turn out too well.

    • Obama on Jay Leno

    Obama on Jay Leno

  • After a nice walk and lunch with Husband, I was given homework to watch Obama on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.  So I accessed it on the web – the full interview is available on nbc.com.  I loved what he had to say about “commen sense regulations” and making sure the the average consumer and the average taxpayer aren’t taken advantage of.  I especially loved what he said about the pseudo-growth in the financial sector, and the real steady growth we need instead:

    And what we need is steady growth; we need young people, instead of — a smart kid coming out of school, instead of wanting to be an investment banker, we need them to decide they want to be an engineer, they want to be a scientist, they want to be a doctor or a teacher.

    And if we’re rewarding those kinds of things that actually contribute to making things and making people’s lives better, that’s going to put our economy on solid footing. We won’t have this kind of bubble-and-bust economy that we’ve gotten so caught up in for the last several years.

    That spoke to me so strongly, as a recent graduate with an excellent NYC-based degree in chemical engineering, I believe I could have easily gone straight into the financial sector and made 6 figures right out of school. I know a number of people who did. I chose, instead, to be a research scientist, and more recently to move to environmental engineering. I did this because I care about a lot more than just money, but I often felt alone in my decisions. I believe we need a system that rewards the agents who do positive things for society, not just the people who can push around numbers all day on Wall Street. Apparently Obama believes this too, and it makes me feel so optimistic and confident in our country’s current leadership.

  • On Thursday First Lady Obama celebrated Women’s History Month by bringing together inspiring women leaders and sending them out to disadvantaged schools to share their stories.  The First Lady herself visited Anacostia:
    Michelle Obama hopes to inspire in celebration of Womens History Month

    Michelle Obama hopes to inspire in celebration of Women's History Month

    At Anacostia High School, the site of a violent melee in November that sent several young people to the hospital with stab wounds, Mrs. Obama gave hugs, slapped knees and sat down in a semi-circle with 13 students, who were all juniors and seniors. (All but three were girls.)

    And when one girl asked, “How you get where you are now?” the first lady told her story.

    “There’s no magic to being here,’’ Mrs. Obama said. “What I want you to know is that my parents were working class people.”

    • Eco-Button sends your computer to sleep

    Eco-Button

  • Buying Green: 9 Environmentally Inventive Products.  I think I’d like an eco-button to put my computer to sleep easily and awake it quickly.
  • The House approved a 90% tax on bonuses for bailed out firms.  This is an interesting way of getting the money back and restricted executive pay and bonuses, but I’m glad they found a way to do so.

    Its backers said the companies had forced Congress to act by inexplicably handing out generous rewards to employees after tapping taxpayer funds to survive an economic calamity brought on by irresponsible and risky executive decisions.

    • Battlestar Galactica

    Battlestar Galactica

  • Finally, I’m really looking forward to watching the final episode of Battlestar Galactica later today.  Husband and I watch all of our tv using the internet, so our viewing party will be tonight instead of last night.

    • Leave a Comment

    You can’t live on $500k in this town? Bull.

    Monday, February 9, 2009 at 9:27 pm (American politics, New York City, apartment living, business, politics)
    Tags:

    I just read this article in the NY Times, on the effect that a plan by Obama to cap top executive pay at $500k for banks accepting bailout money will have on these executive’s lifestyles.

    And I just had to write a post, because nothing pisses me off more than some of this crap. The author nears the article’s conclusion with this:

    The total costs here, which do not include a lot of things, like kennels for the dog when the family is away, summer camp, spas and other grooming for the human members of the family, donations to charity, and frozen hot chocolates at Serendipity, are $790,750, which would require about a $1.6-million salary to compensate for taxes. Give or take a few score thousand of dollars.

    I read a NY Times magazine article during the election season on Obamanomics, and found that I really felt good about his economic policies, ideals, and views.  His positions are probably the closer to my own than those of any other politician, and certainly any president or even major presidential candidate, ever.  One of the things in the article that stood out to me was the tenet that society functions the best, driving production and increasing economic success, when the top executives of a company make about 25x more than the bottom employees.  So if the lowest employees at the bank make $40,000 a year, then the top employees should make about $1 million.  In that case, the $1.6 million/year that the article is claiming is needed to lead the common lifestyle of a bank executive is roughly 50% more expensive than it should be for all of the employees and the company to perform their best.

    The article goes on to explain the need to fit in with other bank executives:

    Does this money buy a chief executive stockholders might prize, a well-to-do man with a certain sureness of stride, something that might be lost if the executive were crowding onto the PATH train every morning at Journal Square, his newspaper splayed against the back of a stranger’s head?

    The man would certainly not feel like himself on that train, said Candace Bushnell, the author of “Sex and the City” and other books chronicling New York social mores.

    “People inherently understand that if they are going to get ahead in whatever corporate culture they are involved in, they need to take on the appurtenances of what defines that culture,” she said. “So if you are in a culture where spending a lot of money is a sign of success, it’s like the same thing that goes back to high school peer pressure. It’s about fitting in.”

    My response? Ok, but the point is, your bank failed and is looking for a government bailout.  You need to suck it up.  Top executives are supposed to earn the pay that they receive, and banks that need bailouts, regardless of how common that may be, failed in their jobs.  So what’s the harm in instating laws to encourage them to work towards success in order to earn the money they make?  That’s what capitalism is supposed to be about.  When they’re able to give themselves huge salaries regardless of whether they lead their companies towards success or complete failure, capitalism isn’t working the way it was meant to, and I’m pretty sure that’s not the capitalism that people like my father hold so dear.

    Even if they’re rare, there are a number of chief executives who lead successful companies without living such extravagant lifestyles.  As far as I know, Warren Buffett, one of the most successful men in the world, is one of them.  Obama’s plan would be hoping to help change the culture of the self-absorbed members, not trying to sink companies in need of a bailout by sinking the self-esteem of their chief executives.  Maybe when they lead their companies to overwhelming success through good decisions and leadership, they can start making over $1 million again.

    These people can’t live on $500k in this town?  I live on $50k in this town.  Maybe I should be teaching them a few things.

    6 Comments

    I just voted for Barack Obama

    Tuesday, November 4, 2008 at 6:25 pm (American politics, Yawns, politics)

    I am so incredibly proud and excited and happy to say that I just voted for the man I believe will become the first African American President of the United States.  That’s change already!

    Leave a Comment

    If the economy implodes

    Tuesday, September 30, 2008 at 4:58 am (American politics)

    Today I read about the House’s rejection of the bailout package and the resulting stock market drop, as well as what I thought was a great e-mail on the bailout from Dan Cantor and the Working Families Party (Wikipedia).

    My next thought, which almost made me cringe with guilt, was “Good. I hope the whole system implodes, and we have to build anew.  And as we build our economy up again, we can reshape it to reward behavior that measurably improves society.”

    Essentially, I think we should rebuild fiscal policy to focus on the double bottom line, which describes when not only fiscal profit but also positive social impact are maximized.   Or, we could go a step further, and measure a triple bottom line.  That’s a term used to describe “an expanded spectrum of values and criteria for measuring organizational (and societal) success: economic, environmental, and social.”  Does it sound radical?  Not to the world community, as the UN ratified this approach in early 2007.

    After thinking this, I decided to do some more research on the situation.  Being signed up for many progressive lists, I had received a few invites to some bailout protests and activities.  But I wasn’t sure if I was against it. I thought back to the stock market crash of 1929 that led to the Great Depression, and wanted to review more of the details of what had happened.  I was worried enough that I didn’t want to write it off as something that will only affect Wall Street without learning some more.  Being lucky enough to live in the time that I do, this information was easy and quick to obtain.  So I was able to spend a few minutes doing some research to help me make up my own mind about what I think should be done.

    I won’t be shocked if we really do have a depression. But I also think it can be averted…

    What do you think?

    1 Comment

    Obama answers ScienceDebate2008 science questions

    Monday, September 1, 2008 at 3:32 am (American politics, politics)

    You can read all of his answers here.  In my opinion, they’re very detailed and describe plans based on facts and science, recognizing and improving on areas where we are currently weak.  One part in particular stood out to me; it was in response to a question about pandemics and biosecurity:

    I will build on America’s unparalleled talent and advantage in STEM fields and the powerful insights into biological systems that are emerging to create new drugs, vaccines, and diagnostic tests and to manufacture these vital products much more quickly and efficiently than is now possible. Unfortunately, the Bush administration has failed to take full advantage of the Bioshield initiative. Because of the unpredictability of the mode of biological attack, I will stress the need for broad-gauged vaccines and drugs and for more agile and responsive drug development and production systems. This effort will strengthen the U.S. biotech and pharmaceutical industry and create high-wage jobs.

    That is right up my alley of skills.  While I’ve never been too excited over the thought of working in industry, I really think I wouldn’t mind one of the jobs created by this initiative!

    1 Comment

    Women’s Equality Day

    Tuesday, August 26, 2008 at 1:09 pm (American politics, feminism, gender, politics)

    Today is Women’s Equality Day, marking the day a mere 88 years ago that women won the right to vote in the US. Here’s a bit about Women’s Equality Day:

    At the behest of Rep. Bella Abzug (D-NY), in 1971 the U.S. Congress designated August 26 as “Women’s Equality Day.”

    The date was selected to commemorate the 1920 passage of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, granting women the right to vote. This was the culmination of a massive, peaceful civil rights movement by women that had its formal beginnings in 1848 at the world’s first women’s rights convention, in Seneca Falls, New York.

    The observance of Women’s Equality Day not only commemorates the passage of the 19th Amendment, but also calls attention to women’s continuing efforts toward full equality. Workplaces, libraries, organizations, and public facilities now participate with Women’s Equality Day programs, displays, video showings, or other activities.

    As long as we’re on the topic of women’s equality, I want to comment on Michelle Obama’s speech last night at the DNC.  I found it really moving and I thought she did a really good job and showed a lot of passion.  If you haven’t seen it, you can go watch it here.  This morning I read the New York Times article “Michelle Obama, Reluctant No More,” and I have to say I was not that happy with it.  It was mostly subtle wording choices and ordering of the information the author chose to include, but I felt like the article highlighted more about what she didn’t like about campaigning and her reservations about her husband running for president than it highlighted how she did choose a life in public service, how she made it so far from such humble, but thoroughly American, roots, and how she is such a strong female role model.

    2 Comments

    Late Cat Wisdom

    Thursday, June 5, 2008 at 7:51 pm (American politics, cat wisdom, politics)

    I intended to choose an Obama quote yesterday and post it, but it turned out to be a very long day. When I got home at about 8, I had some water, took a shower, and went to bed. I thought I’d get up again later that evening to spend a little time with my husband, but I ended up staying in bed all night until I got up for work this morning! It was great to get the rest…

    Anyhow, what I wanted to say was that I am so excited and happy that Obama will be the Democratic Party’s candidate for President! I watched both Clinton and Obama’s speeches on Tuesday night, and I got chills listening to Obama. It was a good time to once again pause, consider, and celebrate the fact that he made it, that he’s the first black candidate for President for one of the two major parties in American politics.

    There was a great NYTimes article, Many Black Find Joy in Unexpected Breakthrough, about how people are responding – primarily, by feeling more optimistic about race relations in America than most of us have in a long time. Within the article, Obama is quoted as saying in an NBC interview:

    Probably the most powerful story I heard was today at a conference, a woman came up to me. She said her son teaches in an inner-city school in San Francisco and said that he has seen a change in behavior among the young African-American boys there in terms of how they think about their studies. And, you know, so those are the kinds of things that I think make you appreciate that it’s not about you as an individual. But it’s about our country and the progress we’ve made.

    It’s very moving to me to hear about how this is affecting and motivating some of our country’s youth. I believe that a lack of similar role models (from similar backgrounds) really does on the whole affect us as we grow up and set our career goals and life plans.

    I’m not sure that Hillary Clinton is my favorite candidate for VP (because I disagree with some of her politics, wishing she was more liberal, and because I am turned off by her methods of traditional politicking), but I sure do salivate at the thought of a black and a woman leading the nation from the white house next year! Just the fact that it’s a real possibility gives me more pride in America than I’ve had in years.

    For my new Cat Wisdom quote, I am taking an excerpt from the closing of his nomination victory speech on Tuesday night. Many times during the speech, Husband and I cheered, clapped, hollered, and high-fived, despite the fact that we were alone in our apartment. But this part not only gave me chills when I watched him deliver the speech but gives me chills now, as I reread the text:

    In our country, I have found that this cooperation happens not because we agree on everything, but because behind all the labels and false divisions and categories that define us; beyond all the petty bickering and point-scoring in Washington, Americans are a decent, generous, compassionate people, united by common challenges and common hopes. And every so often, there are moments which call on that fundamental goodness to make this country great again.

    So it was for that band of patriots who declared in a Philadelphia hall the formation of a more perfect union; and for all those who gave on the fields of Gettysburg and Antietam their last full measure of devotion to save that same union.

    So it was for the Greatest Generation that conquered fear itself, and liberated a continent from tyranny, and made this country home to untold opportunity and prosperity.

    So it was for the workers who stood out on the picket lines; the women who shattered glass ceilings; the children who braved a Selma bridge for freedom’s cause.

    So it has been for every generation that faced down the greatest challenges and the most improbable odds to leave their children a world that’s better, and kinder, and more just.

    And so it must be for us.

    America, this is our moment. This is our time. Our time to turn the page on the policies of the past. Our time to bring new energy and new ideas to the challenges we face. Our time to offer a new direction for the country we love.

    The journey will be difficult. The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment – this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals.

    2 Comments

    Another Millenials article speaks to me

    Tuesday, May 13, 2008 at 5:42 pm (American politics, Gen Y, about me, financial woes, health, politics)

    In the past few months I’ve continually come across mentions of Millenials or Gen Y, and since I know I fell in around there age-wise and identify most strongly with the young people of today, they have always piqued my curiosity. So I immediately clicked through to the article when I saw Bob Herbert’s op-ed “Here Come the Millenials” on the list of most e-mailed articles on the NYTimes.

    When I first got there, I wasn’t sure what to expect. I thought, “Here’s what other people are reading about my generation.” But it actually turned out to make me more self-aware of how not alone I am, how many, many others who grew up in the same America I did are facing the same things.

    A number of studies, including new ones by the Center for American Progress in Washington and by Demos, a progressive think tank in New York, have shown that Americans in this age group are faced with a variety of challenges that are tougher than those faced by young adults over the past few decades. Among the challenges are worsening job prospects, lower rates of health insurance coverage and higher levels of debt.

    This struck me hard. Husband and I absolutely face all three of those (bold emphasis mine). While we are highly educated and skilled enough that we are both confident we can find jobs when needed, the choices may be more limited than we’d originally hoped.

    When I met Husband, he was working as an elementary school computer teacher, despite his degree in CS and experience in web jobs during the late 90’s. He didn’t want to do this forever, but it was a job, and it paid something, so he was there. He had been doing web design on the side, and I encouraged him to try to find a job in that full-time. He was miserable in that job, so with his freelance plus my work-study income, we decided that he could quit, quickly improve his web portfolio, and find a new job. That winter, he did, but it didn’t include benefits, vacation, etc. He took it as a way to get his foot (back) in the door, and worked for a year without health insurance coverage. Meanwhile, we both had racked up debt on my credit card for things like, oh, eating.

    The story could continue but I’m going to stop there. You get the point. Similar themes as we progressed through the next 3 years, and here we are. My being kicked out of school leaves me without health insurance, and Husband has been unwisely living without it for a year and a half, despite the fact that he’s on medications and has some medical issues. For the summer I have work lined up, but, surprise surprise, without the possibility of benefits. I just looked up yesterday the cost of putting Husband and I on a health insurance plan for the self-employed – $700 or more combined. Each month.

    Among other things, we are fed up with the government. We see that in a completely free-market economy the rich get rich and the poor get, well, shit on. We both think that while free-market works well for a lot of things (like motivation for work to be done well and efficiently), we need more safety nets, more regulations to ensure opportunities for the poor and minorities, and more compassion in American politics.

    Later in the article, Herbert writes:

    According to the study: “Millennials mostly reject the conservative viewpoint that government is the problem, and that free markets always produce the best results for society. Indeed, Millennials’ views are more progressive than those of other age groups today, and are more progressive than previous generations when they were younger.”

    The study is right on, because that’s exactly how we feel. This is not the America I learned about growing up. I see so many people in worse situation than ours (around me everyday when I go home to my apartment in the Bronx or any time I visit Husband’s family), and Husband and I both are fed up with the political state of the country. Even most of the “liberals” aren’t liberal enough for us. You think America offers equal opportunity? Bullshit.

    7 Comments

    Expelled?

    Wednesday, April 23, 2008 at 10:13 pm (American politics, Humanism, atheism, politics, religion)
    Tags:

    Ugh. I am so sickened by even the previews and hype around this new documentary, “Expelled.” From watching the preview, I get the idea that Ben Stein is trying to tell us all that science is persecuting those that disagree…but the problem is, science isn’t about freedom of speech, it’s about TRUTH. And if you come up with some bullshit that can’t be falsified through tests, then I’m sorry, but you’re not making a scientific hypothesis and scientists do NOT need to respect you. So, the hypothesis that there is a “creator” who is guiding the design of life on earth, well…it’s not science. You can have that hypothesis if you want, and you can tell your children that’s what you believe if you want, but you absolutely 100% do NOT have the authority to make my children hear about it in schools, or to be demand respect from the scientific community.

    Dan Whipple writes in the Center for Inquiry’s publication PSICOP:

    Expelled is such a morass of innuendo, untruth, irrationality, and fear-mongering that it’s hard to know where to start dissecting it. While presenting a brief for teaching intelligent design (in university classrooms, at least), the film never says what intelligent design is. Then, at a media telephonic extravaganza on January 22, Stein and co-producer Walter Ruloff said they had no theology to promote.

    Said Ruloff, “We really are not validating one particular position, being the intelligent design or the design hypothesis, or creationism or other forms. What we’re really asking for is freedom of speech.” But the movie, or even a cursory review of the film’s Web sites (www.getexpelled.com and www.expelledthemovie.com), shows that this assertion is—how to put this politely?—unsupported. Says the GetExpelled.com site, “For decades now, Neo-Darwinism has maintained a stranglehold within public education, suppressing all other theories on the origins of life—especially those that hint of a ‘designer.’”

    And this tidbit from that same piece is a real gem:

    ID isn’t explained very well in Expelled and neither is Darwinism. This quote from Ben Stein comes from the movie’s telephonic promotional extravaganza. It’s not in the film itself, but the theme is pervasive in the film:

    “Darwinism as I understand it—and maybe I don’t understand it,” Stein said, “but Darwinism holds that life began by something like lightning striking a puddle and inorganic matter was converted into living matter. And from that, after four-and-half-billion years, came the form of life that we now know.”

    Well, clearly he doesn’t understand it. He made a documentary that’s on the big screens and made top 10 at the box office last weekend, and he didn’t even bother to research what Darwinism is! Evolution and natural selection make no claims about how the first life began, only how it evolved after that point. While the origin of life is a fascinating question that scientists are investigating, the various theories on how life could have begun naturally are still being developed and data is still being gathered. The fact that we haven’t yet pinpointed exactly how the first living organisms began doesn’t negate the evidence for the truth of evolution, the science of how all of the species and organisms living today descended from that first life.

    The article in CSICOP directed me to another interesting piece in Scientific American, Six Things in Expelled that Ben Stein Doesn’t Want You to Know. One of these things I had already heard of:

    3) Scientists in the film thought they were being interviewed for a different movie.
    As Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers, Eugenie Scott, Michael Shermer and other proponents of evolution appearing in Expelled have publicly remarked, the producers first arranged to interview them for a film that was to be called Crossroads, which was allegedly a documentary on “the intersection of science and religion.” They were subsequently surprised to learn that they were appearing in Expelled, which “exposes the widespread persecution of scientists and educators who are pursuing legitimate, opposing scientific views to the reigning orthodoxy,” to quote from the film’s press kit.

    Pretty deceptive of the filmmakers, huh? I bet then they probably selectively cut interviews to show those scientists as unfavorably as possible. Again, ughhh.

    I also found that Scientific American has a whole slew of articles on the the documentary, which you can check out at this page: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed–Scientific American’s Take.

    7 Comments

    « Older entries