I have considered every aspect of this bill and although I think that right now it will not pay for itself, in the very near future it has a strong chance of paying for itself and even resulting in a surplus to go towards the national debt.  The vast majority of provisions in the bill will no doubt be costly, after all the intention is to ensure that everyone has adequate health care.  It isn’t cheap to insure 300 million people.  In reality, a large chunk of those 300 million will be paying for their own health care plus a little more to help cover the less fortunate, so I think that part will be a wash.  The part that really worried me was the administrative costs.  Yes, the bill proposes all kinds of things to ensure this program is administered as efficiently as possible.  Those of us who actually work in the government sector know better.  Few, if any government run programs are run efficiently.  I guess much of that is subjective, efficiency can be a fairly elusive concept to nail down. The bill we have made into law recently creates dozens of new federal agencies and will require hiring over 15,000 new IRS employees to manage certain monitoring and collection functions. I have not been able to find an estimate of just how many new federal employees will be hired so I am just going to guess and say its about one cubic butt load. For those readers unfamiliar with that term, I assure it is very large.

Those pesky admin costs really had me not liking this bill until I was reminded today of the Tanning Tax. Wow, this is what really put me over for this bill. I hadn’t thought much of the Tanning Tax recently since I had completely written it off as stupid and inconsequential when it was first proposed. I personally thought that the “Botox” Tax was a much better idea as a revenue generator since it would levy a tax on all elective plastic surgery. Living in Southern California, I can tell that this would result in a ton of annual money. No matter what the rate, these people will not give up their plastic surgery! Unfortunately, the “Botox” Tax was not included in the final bill. Apparently the plastic surgeons have a better lobbying group than the tanning salon owners. No big surprise there really. We still have the Tanning Tax though, and its inclusion is really the key to making this whole thing work. Will a ten percent tax on each and every tanning session pay for all the admin costs in this bill? Oh, hell no! But it doesn’t have to. And that is the real beauty of it all.

The justification for the Tanning Tax is fairly simple. People who use tanning booths are more likely to get skin cancer and thus should have to pay some extra fee in order to help defray the costs of treating those cancers later in life. To be honest, I have no idea how much a typical tanning session costs. I live in Southern California and drive a convertible, so I pretty much get my daily Vitamin D for free. Lets assume for this scenario though that the tax will amount to $2.00 per visit. If a person were to tan once a week for 30 years, that would generate $3,120 (not adjusted for inflation) in taxes. Now I am also not familiar with how much it costs to treat skin cancer after 30 years of UV exposure, but I think its likely more than the tax will generate. However, since these people will now be taking advantage of their brand new super whamodyne health care packages and seeing the doctor much more often, most of these cancers will be detected early enough that they can be excised right there in the doctor’s office for a mere pittance! That leaves the rest of that tax money to go towards paying the admin costs! A recent study shows that as many as 30 million people a year use tanning salons. Even cutting the total in half to account for people who only use them seasonally, this tax provides over $700 million a year! That will pay for a veritable army of admin types.

And it doesn’t end there. Once people realize what great revenue generator the Tanning Tax is, it will be easy to add in new taxes to pay for all those other risky behaviors. Tired of paying for other peoples weight related health problems? There’s a tax for that! Want to make sure Uncle Fred pays his fair share for laying around on the couch eating chips all day and then needing a coronary bypass? There’s a tax for that! How about stupid drivers that cut you off on the freeway? They are most likely going to use up more emergency medical care than you. There’s a tax for that! Studies show that unhappy people get sick more often than happy people. So you better turn that frown upside down buddy because there’s a tax for that to! The amount of money that we can generate using this amazing process is virtually limitless. How about skydivers? They like to claim that compared to the number of jumps per year, their accident rate is actually very low. That may be true, but if that chute doesn’t open and Mr. Jumpoutofaperfectlygoodplane happens to survive, he is going to be in the hospital for a long time. And besides, it just looks dangerous. YOU ARE JUMPING OUT OF A FREAKING PLANE FOR GOD’S SAKE!

Of course we have to work out all the details of exactly how to assess and collect these taxes, how much the rate will be, and a few other minor details but in the end it should be obvious that it is all paid for and we will still have funds left over. By my calculations (which I am performed in my bathroom with the lights off so nobody could see, and no I am not going to share the numbers with you) we will completely erase the national debt within 3 years. Yes, that’s right three short years. Damn I am excited. Being a liberal is so much more rewarding than hanging out with those stupid redneck tea-partiers.

So I am on your side now guys! Just as long as you are going to let me wear my gun to the next coffee party. What’s that? Oh, you’re uncomfortable around armed people… Well never mind then, it was a nice thought though.

Share on Facebook

Well, it is beginning to look as if you are going to get your way.  Under intense pressure from party leadership and organized labor, the last Democrat holdouts are about to buckle under and vote yes on the largest expansion of the Federal Government since the “New Deal”.  I can’t say that I blame them.  Faced with a virtually guaranteed no win situation, I guess I would probably go ahead and vote the way I really wanted to all along and hope for the best.  A “yes” vote only likely means getting voted out of office while a “no” vote means definitely losing party support and millions of dollars in contributions form Big Labor.  Pretty easy decision when you think about it.

At least this entire fiasco has made the voting public more aware of what their elected representatives are and are not capable of.  We have seen that the vast majority are incapable of simply voting their conscience.  And by conscience, I mean listening to the people that elected them and actually representing their best interests.  We have seen people that we trusted to make informed decisions vote on massive pieces of legislation that they could not possibly have had time to read and fully comprehend.  Even if you allow for a large staff reading the bill and thoroughly briefing said elected official, several votes occurred too fast for even that to happen.  Perhaps most importantly we have learned that parliamentary process is no more than what the party in control wants it to be.  There are no standards, only rules that can be twisted and changed to best suit whichever party has the power to make those rules.  This goes for Republicans and Democrats alike.

Before this issue was thrust upon us, the lines drawn between you and me were much less clear.  We have all been forced to view this spectacle through polarizing lenses shaded in the colors of Republican and Democrat.  I have always considered myself to be a fiscally conservative, constitutional Republican.  That definition allowed me the freedom to occasionally step into that not-so-clear zone between you and me and sometimes even meet you there for a cup of coffee and a nice chat.  That just isn’t so easy anymore.  It seems now that anytime I decide to venture into that fuzzy intersection on ideas, I have to go farther over to your side to get you to talk.  I just can’t do that anymore.

So, as we all sit here on the edge of history waiting for the American political landscape to change forever, I have one thing to ask of you.   When you begin to chafe under a 50-60% tax burden, when you can’t get that new cancer drug because it’s just too expensive, or you finally realize that maybe the government has gotten a little too big,  don’t let me hear you complain.   You can gripe and bitch all you want, I just don’t want to hear it.  If you can do that for me, then I promise I will never say “I told you so”.

Please don’t take this to mean that our friendship is over my liberal brothers and sisters.  We can still be part of each others lives.  I am sure we will find new things to discuss, new ideas to argue about and maybe we will even solve a few problems along the way.   And we will have many problems to solve.  Even if this current piece of government expansion fails, there will be other attempts.  We still have to come together in the never never land between our ideals and decide how our children will ever be able to repay the massive debt we have already bestowed upon them.  Our Grandparents are already remembered in the history books as “The Greatest Generation”.  I wonder how history will view our generation.

Your Conservative Friend,

Rich

Share on Facebook

I have made many efforts to alleviate this problem.  I have two drawers in my desk with hanging file folders neatly labeled for every concievable subject I may need to file under.  I use a personal planner from Franklin Covey where I can keep schedule information, phone numbers, and lots of other information that I wasn’t even aware I needed to keep track of until I bought the planner.  And yet, I still end up with piles of stuff cluttering my desk.  Due to having so many drawers and piles, finding any specific item usually takes awhile.  Sometimes, I can’t find the item at all even though I am sure I did not throw it away.  If I threw things away, I doubt I would have so many large piles.  I am convinced that once a certain mass density is reached on a desk, small black holes are formed.  These black holes are not large enough to be immediately noticed but do have enough gravitational pull to suck in one or two pieces of paper before disipating.

Being the good manager that I am, I decided to evaluate all of the above problem areas and then develop and implement a workable solution.  And so I am proud to present to you the optimum filing system for the chronically disorganized, the “Monocolumnar Administration, Information and Data System” or MAIDS.  Implementation is simple; take everything on or in your desk and put it in one big pile on the corner.  Finding any item is now simply a matter of excavation, the search phase has been eliminated.

Jim – “Hey Rich, where did you put the schedule for next week”

Rich – “Right there” (points to MAIDS)

Jime – “Hey Rich, do you have laste weeks TPS report?”

Rich – “Yep, right there” (points to MAIDS)

I still haven’t figured out how to solve the black hole issue.  I requisitioned a particle accelerator yeaterday.  I’ll let you know how that works out next week.

Share on Facebook

From Article I -

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

From Article II -

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

So nowhere does the Constitution discuss the President writing bills and presenting them to Congress.   I really don’t care how others may interpret the above phrases either.  That is not how the Founding Fathers intended things and it is not how it should work.   There are many, many good reasons for the three branches to have separate and equal (at least as equal as possible) powers and we all know the reasons our government was established in that manner.   Remember, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  I would also add that surrendered power is rarely returned without bloodshed.

Rich

Share on Facebook

In the 70′s the SO2 concentrations in coal burning plant exhaust was sufficient to produce detrimental effects on both the populace and the environment in the form of Acid Rain.  There were several attempts to find ways to solve this but no legislation could move forward because the cost to industry was considered far to high.  Several economists, using different economic models went through many variations on methods and means to achieve the noble goal of the end of acid rain.  All of these models included some form of restriction on emissions, enforceable by the EPA, but it wasn’t until one of these economists considered a secondary economy of transportable credits that could be traded between emitters that they came upon a model that was economically feasible.  Thus Cap & Trade was born.  This economic model was put into fashion by a bipartisan group that agreed on the problem, and decided to find a feasible solution.  And in 1990 G.H.W. Bush signed the amendments to the Clean Air Act of 1970 into law, capping SO2 emissions and creating a barter system that rewarded efficient companies and innovators that could find ways to reduce their emissions, and leaving the majority of the burden of the price tag on those companies that could not change.  Of course some portion of this increase in the cost of doing business would be passed on to the consumer but since the goal was noble and everyone essentially agreed that the problem needed to be fixed everyone was willing to accept the additional costs and move forward.  And it was very successful (when the EPA effectively enforced it) and acid rain has been drastically reduced.  NOx emissions were next, and also very effective.

Now we get to the current debate.  The GOP has been fighting hard against these controls being applied to CO2 emissions, and that is the real issue.  They are actually arguing that controls on CO2 are too costly, why you ask, because they don’t believe that man made CO2 has the harmful effects that the IPCC or most of the rest of the world has agreed upon by consensus.   That’s right, they do not believe in Climate Change, and this is why they oppose Cap & Trade.  It is not that the Cap & Trade policy is bad, it has been proven as an effective tool in reducing emissions, providing incentives to innovate and change, and at the least effective cost to the consumers/tax payers and industry as a whole.  Some members of the GOP will still say that they don’t believe but since the media mocks them and tries to show them as radical conservatives or loons, most no longer are willing to step out from the herd like that.  So they argue against bills or measures that would actually make strides towards reducing carbon in the atmosphere, and avoid the subject as to what their real motivation is.  If they bought into climate change, they would be applauding the application of Cap & Trade as the most effective means that can be provided at the least cost.

Whether you believe in climate change or not is not the issue.  It is the manner in which these people that represent us that matters.  The GOP has effectively blocked this legislation, and though, not officially, this bill is dead.  CO2 will continue to be unregulated which is the GOPs real intent.  The threat to put it under EPA jurisdiction is just that, a threat.  The EPA cannot act unilaterally and declare something controllable without an expected back lash, and subsequent lawsuits.  It is just a matter of time until this happens.

Chris

Share on Facebook

 The arguements against gay marriage usually fall along one of three points:

The basis of marriage is about procreation:  This is false, many people get married and not only don’t have children, but they have no intention in having children.  Should these marriages be negated?  Should any woman be allowed to marry after menopause?  If a guy has a vasectomoy while married should he be automatically divorced because of this?  These are the absurd questions that can crop up when we use this as the primary basis for marriage, which, incidentally, is currently the only arguement being used to defend Proposition 8 out there on the left coast.

The basis of morality:  This puts the institution of marriage more soundly in the realm of a religious institution and not a legal one.  Religion and philosophy are the foundation of moral teachings and the State has no place in the defining of morals.  If a gay person wants to get married they should petition their church, not the State.  This is where civil unions come in as a tool of the State, but I will get to this piece of legal documentation later.

The basis of harming the existing institution of marriage:  This is my favorite arguement used and the worst of the bunch.  There is nothing that cheapens or weakens my marriage other than the decisions my wife and I make, any argument otherwise is absurd.  And there is very little anyone can do to convince me that anything harms the institution of marriage like divorce does.  This single act of breaking your vows and throwing out the promises that make up the union of marriage is what harms it, not two other people getting married, regardless of sexual orientation.  Until the religious right can make it so hard to get divorced that people stop and think before getting married I won’t be convinced that they are interested in protecting the institution of marriage.

The arguements for gay marriage are simple, but they are as fruitless as the opposition to them.  Gay people want to be accepted for who they are.  This is a desire that almost all people want and it is both understandable and a fair request.  The problem that they run into is that too many people believe that the acts that they commit as a part of their lifestyle are grievous or mortal sins and therefore they believe that they cannot accept the person as they are or they will be seen as condoning the behavior.  Of course people of the G.L.B.T. community do not like the fact that a portion of the population, regardless of how big this portion is, thinks they are evil, corrupt, lost, or just plain wrong for being who they are.  The compromise has been to offer Civil Unions in place of marriage certificates or licenses.  The G.L.B.T. community disagrees with this on the principle that it reduces them to a second class citizen and they are “equal but separate” adding to the concept that this is a civil rights issue.   Every one of the legal protections afforded by this piece of paper are already accessible in the current system but it requires a few extra hoops and comes at a slightly higher price, which is a penalty for a lifestyle, again pushing this in the direction of the arguement that this is a civil rights issue. 

The proper compromise is simple, the State should only issue Civil Union licenses or certificates, period.   No more Marriage Licenses!   A wedding is a religious ceremony and a marriage is a partnership, two separate things.  But because the average American does not separate these two things they can no longer accept the idea that the legal protections provided by this certification of their partnership has nothing to do with the arguements listed above regarding morality or anything else.  If any two people want to form a personal, legal bond then this should be allowed, it says nothing in regards to the actual nature of the relationship nor the acts that they perform in the privacy of their homes.   Of course once you enter into any partnership, if you choose to leave it you have to go through other legal hoops to disolve the legal partnership you have created, but that is a different discussion.  This solution is fair and will provide equal treatment for all, and it will still provide the State with a small revenue stream.  For the time being, members of the G.L.B.T. community will still be treated as second class citizens in one way shape or form, as do almost any minority population, that is human nature and is not likely to change just because you cram it down your oppositions throat.

Share on Facebook

Well, actually It was back in August.  At the time I told myself it was because I was going to school full-time and couldn’t work full-time AND go to school.  This was true.  This was also not the whole story.

Being a veteran, I have had the amazing opportunity to use the GI bill.  Currently, they will pay a living alotment and pay the tuition.  It’s a great deal.  I can actually go to school full-time, and if I manage my money tightly (very tightly), not have to work.  This is what I’ve been doing.

Unemployment in California is 12%.  Some people think I was completely crazy for quitting my job in the face of that.  I recently realized what made me send my boss a letter that fateful day back in August.  I felt guilty.  I felt guilty for having a job which I didn’t like, didn’t need, while there were lots of people who desperately needed work.  One guy I worked with did the job just because “he was bored”, his wife made over $250,000 a year.  That disgusted me. I could only see that as a selfish greed.  An arrogant, “I’m going to do whatever I want” attitude.  Those of you that know me might be laughing, because that was certainly my attitude in the Navy (sorry!!!), but I’ve come to realize that we have a responsibility as Americans.  A responsibility to pay debt (D’oh!), to help others, and to not be greedy.

I realized that it was my responsibility as a citizen of the United States of America, to do everything I could, to sacrifice what I could to help others.  No one forced me to do it, no one asked me to do it.  Hell, at the time, I don’t even think I realized why I was doing it.  I did it because I didn’t need it.  This was my sacrifice, opening up a decent-paying job for someone who would respect it and use it, someone who needed it.  I’m sure there were plenty of those people around.  Heck, mabye the guy that they hired as a temp got to be full-time, he certainly needed it.  And I didn’t.  I’m not trying to blow my own horn, as I said -I didn’t realize this at the time, but we all need to make sacrifices, and maybe I can sleep easier knowing that though I am a poor student, barely getting by (actually moving to Dallas, Tx because its much cheaper to live) maybe, just maybe, there is someone coming home from work every day, doing the job that I did, putting food on the table for his children.

Maybe.

Share on Facebook

If you look at the recent military engagements around the world, most are completely ineffective.  Indeed, there have been many comparisons to Vietnam, Korea etc.  The fact of the matter is that fighting ideology cannot be done lightly.  Back in WWII there was this concept of “Collateral Damage” that is to say, civilian casualties.  We accepted this.  We didn’t like it, but it was understood as necessary to defeat the enemy.  It used to be widely held that in order to win, you must counter with at least equal force that the enemy attacks with.

We have grown morally over the last 60 years.  We need not look at wartime casualties to see the moralistic chain of events.  First civil rights, followed closely by womens’ rights, being debated currently is homosexual’s rights.  We are morally moving away from the time where we simply accepted casualties in war.

There seems to be an opinion that we should be able to win without losing a single soldier.  I’m not sure how this is possible, but every argument about the war has this undertone, -civilian death is unacceptable, civilian targets cannot be destroyed, etc.

How is a soldier in the field supposed to tell the difference between a civilian or an enemy?  By the time they start shooting it’ll be too late in many cases.  My father reminded me of something from the Vietnam era, when a 12 yr old child holds a rifle pointing at you, what do you do?  Do you kill him?  Did you just kill a soldier or a civilian?  A man or a child?  Are you a murderer?  My father is a hero to me, and he believed in “total war.”  Not only do you destroy the enemy (including collateral damage, after all, that’s the enemies fault), but you destroy their ability to make war.  Sort of like blasting them back to the stone age.

I disagree with this.  Conventionally, we cannot win wars anymore.  I firmly believe this, we have lost our dedication, or our old views on life that allowed us to morally justify the mass destruction necessary to win wars.  We cannot win when the enemy is willing to hide bombs on people and go into towns and detonate them.  Must we match force with force?  I’m not sure.  I am not, however, a person of non-action.

Propaganda, my friends.  Thought is the natural enemy of ideology.  Critical thinking and education destroys ideology faster than a bullet.  Now, I am not supposing that we should drop books on them, nor should we be completely unwilling to fight.  But we need to add a powerful non-violent weapon to our arsenal.  We need to find ways to infiltrate their lifestyle, ways to get the people over there to shed their narrow ideology.  This is not easy (HUGE understatement), however, often I find the right things are never easy.  We need to educate, we need to support the non-violent Muslims.  Just like the Catholic church has changed its stance on many topics with the advent of science (usually after torturing or burning the people who originally spread those “nasty” ideas.  RIP Galileo) there are many progressive Muslims who believe that the violence is wrong.  There are not enough bombs or bullets in the world to defeat religious ideology, but education, and ideas can certainly help.

We need to start finding ways to defeat the ideology from within.  And I know education is a start.

Share on Facebook

Since Veteran’s Day also leads us into the Holiday season, I thought it might be appropriate to re-post a poem I first read many years ago.  I have always loved this poem since it not only expresses the sentiments of most civilians but also explains how we verterans really feel about serving.  After nearly 20 years of service, I am eternally greatful to thos who have allowed me to serve this country and have made it all worthwhile.  And now for the poem. If you haven’t seen this before, you may want to have a tissue handy.  To the best of my knowledge, the original author is unknown but is reportedly a marine who was stationed in Okinawa at the time and only requests that the poem be sent to as many people as possible.

Happy Veteran’s Day!

TWAS THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS,
HE LIVED ALL ALONE,
IN A ONE BEDROOM HOUSE MADE OF
PLASTER AND STONE.

I HAD COME DOWN THE CHIMNEY
WITH PRESENTS TO GIVE,
AND TO SEE JUST WHO
IN THIS HOME DID LIVE.

I LOOKED ALL ABOUT,
A STRANGE SIGHT I DID SEE,
NO TINSEL, NO PRESENTS,
NOT EVEN A TREE.

NO STOCKING BY MANTLE,
JUST BOOTS FILLED WITH SAND,
ON THE WALL HUNG PICTURES
OF FAR DISTANT LANDS.

WITH MEDALS AND BADGES,
AWARDS OF ALL KINDS,
A SOBER THOUGHT
CAME THROUGH MY MIND.

FOR THIS HOUSE WAS DIFFERENT,
IT WAS DARK AND DREARY,
I FOUND THE HOME OF A SOLDIER,
ONCE I COULD SEE CLEARLY.

THE SOLDIER LAY SLEEPING,
SILENT, ALONE,
CURLED UP ON THE FLOOR
IN THIS ONE BEDROOM HOME.

THE FACE WAS SO GENTLE,
THE ROOM IN SUCH DISORDER,
NOT HOW I PICTURED
A UNITED STATES SOLDIER.

WAS THIS THE HERO
OF WHOM I’D JUST READ?
CURLED UP ON A PONCHO,
THE FLOOR FOR A BED?

I REALIZED THE FAMILIES
THAT I SAW THIS NIGHT,
OWED THEIR LIVES TO THESE SOLDIERS
WHO WERE WILLING TO FIGHT.

SOON ROUND THE WORLD,
THE CHILDREN WOULD PLAY,
AND GROWNUPS WOULD CELEBRATE
A BRIGHT CHRISTMAS DAY.

THEY ALL ENJOYED FREEDOM
EACH MONTH OF THE YEAR,
BECAUSE OF THE SOLDIERS,
LIKE THE ONE LYING HERE.

I COULDN’T HELP WONDER
HOW MANY LAY ALONE,
ON A COLD CHRISTMAS EVE
IN A LAND FAR FROM HOME.

THE VERY THOUGHT
BROUGHT A TEAR TO MY EYE,
I DROPPED TO MY KNEES
AND STARTED TO CRY.

THE SOLDIER AWAKENED
AND I HEARD A ROUGH VOICE,
“SANTA DON’T CRY,
THIS LIFE IS MY CHOICE;

I FIGHT FOR FREEDOM,
I DON’T ASK FOR MORE,
MY LIFE IS MY GOD,
MY COUNTRY, MY CORPS.”

THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER
AND DRIFTED TO SLEEP,
I COULDN’T CONTROL IT,
I CONTINUED TO WEEP.

I KEPT WATCH FOR HOURS,
SO SILENT AND STILL
AND WE BOTH SHIVERED
FROM THE COLD NIGHT’S CHILL.

I DIDN’T WANT TO LEAVE
ON THAT COLD, DARK, NIGHT,
THIS GUARDIAN OF HONOR
SO WILLING TO FIGHT.

THEN THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER,
WITH A VOICE SOFT AND PURE,
WHISPERED, “CARRY ON SANTA,
IT’S CHRISTMAS DAY, ALL IS SECURE.

ONE LOOK AT MY WATCH,
AND I KNEW HE WAS RIGHT.
“MERRY CHRISTMAS MY FRIEND,
AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT.

Share on Facebook

I currently drive a 2001 Toyota Mr2 Spyder.  This car already gets pretty decent gas mileage, but every little bit counts right?  So, on my last tank of gas, I followed all the tips and tricks that I could reasonably follow from this website  http://www.hypermiling.com.  Several of the suggestions really didn’t seem too necessary to me so I chose not to use them.  I really didn’t think I needed a chilled vest since I rarely use the AC anyway, and my tire pressure is usually dead on.

For those of you who have never heard of hypermiling and were to lazy to read the website, here is a short summary of what this change of driving habits entails.  Basically you drive more sensibly and with a constant mind set of increasing your mileage.  I figured I would see great gains in mileage as I normally drive like wild raccoon on crack, so this part was easy.  The hard part is when you get into the more “advanced” techniques such as coasting up to red lights in hope that they will change before you have to make a full stop, taking exit ramps while slowing down as little as possible, driving at or just below the speed limit, and generally pissing off everyone around you.  This has proven to be most difficult here in Southern California, garnering me far more attention on the freeway than I ever wanted.

So, after a full tank of dodging red lights, avoiding road rage on the freeway, and basically driving like grandma after a trip to the dentist, the little light came on and I went and filled it back up.  I pretty much knew the results based on how many miles I got out of the tank, but I wanted to do the calculation anyway to get the most accurate numbers.  And the net gain for all my hard work and painful foot restraint?  Three lousy freakin miles per gallon!!

I don’t who these freaks are that talk about getting 150 miles per gallon, but they must live at the top of a hill and push the car home at the end of the day.  Granted, the guys getting 150 mpg are driving hybrids, but there are guys driving regular little 4 cylinders like mine claiming to get 60 mpg.   They should be thrown into a fiery pit of burning oil, liars!  They can have their damn hypermiling, I don’t think the lousy three mpg is worth the bullets I will have to dodge on the freeway if I keep driving like this.  In fact, I think I need to put a bigger engine in my car so I can use even more gas!

So keep the pedal to the metal and don’t let granny pass you!

Share on Facebook