Igorsky's Comments

Sirius XM Needs a Growth Plan

Fri, 08 May 2009 20:01:41 -0400

SIRI has a growth plan. Here are two possible good reasons they keep it to themselves for now..

First, they are working on it and/or are under negotiations (re: iPod/iPhone apps). A good negotiator does not hype his potential benefits before the agreement is sealed.

Second, in SIR's business where there are lots of competition, it is best not to show their hand long before they can deliver their 'new' product or services. Getting a long head start with the competition is always good practice for getting a good chunk of the market before competition can adjust. This is the lesson iPod / iPhone has shown us. I am hoping SIRI will accomplish the same.

I do not thing MEL is a one dimension manager. He has eliminated his direct competition through merger (XM) and he has avoided BK. Now he is concentrating in growing the business. He already has an agreement with Toyota, Honda, Nissan and KIA/Hyundai should not be far behind if he has not already. As the economy improves, more truckers will be adding SIRI radios in their cabs. Remember how in the 60's, CB's were the rage among truckers? He could very well be exploring adding the audio portion of some of Malone's direct TV shows to his programming.

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:10:02 -0400

On bonus bill blocking Congress ....that would apply a 90% tax on executive bonus payments made by companies receiving more than $5B in federal bailout funds, it seems like our legislators once more are protecting their campaign contributors.

When they put in the provision that the law....."would apply to payments made after Dec. 31, 2008" ... they put in a big loophole that Merill Lynch bonus receipients will get to keep their bonus money after running down the company and saddling the taxpayers with debt. I wonder if this is another of Chris Dodd's/Barney Frank's unconsionable acts.

Mark-to-Market: The Bogeyman of the 1930s Is Back

Sat, 14 Mar 2009 23:29:26 -0400

Looking at this financial crisis thru the MtM angle is avery narrow view and has led Mr. Sunshine to an off base conclusion.

The reason this financial crisis did not tank as deeply as it has now were/are the existence of:

Glass Steagal Act
FED
FDIC
SEC
Uptic rule, etc.

Some of the major reasons for this crisis now are:

Repeal of Glass Steagall Act in 1998
Removal of Uptic rule
Passing of Community Redevelopment Act (1978)
Creation of Derivatives (unregulated)
Creation of Credit Default Swap (this is a real biggie)
Creation of CDO's (many banks no longer hold many of the mortgages in their potfolio..example: Countrywide)

To blame MtM as the cause does not hold water. It was reintroduced in 2007 because it became very apparent to FASB that the bank risks had to be gotten out of hand and had to be Fair Valued. Its reintroduction has actually saved the world from a much deeper crisis. Keep the MtM now and maybe, we will be free of anther financial crisis for 20 years or until people forget and repeat the same mistakes again.

Italy Joins the Nuclear Thaw

Mon, 09 Mar 2009 15:17:47 -0400

To CLH, with today's signing of the document that affirms science over 'faith', Obama may not be far from being convinced by his 'scientific' energy man Mr. Chu, he will start to see the light on nuclear power. Hoever, i am not holding m breath.

Obama Talks Himself Into - And Out of - Bank Nationalization

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 15:45:58 -0500

Jake Berzon

You should also watch Boncaccio's NOW interview with Bethany McLean the week before. She got it right including ethics and sociology of people. She correctly identifed the Enron debacle long before it became obvious to people and again with this subprime fiasco. She is very sharp, knowledgeable and ... well, appealingly very pretty!

Life After Coal: Coming Sooner than You Think

Mon, 16 Feb 2009 17:22:30 -0500

Jimbo

The reason the Danes have a good working windpower grid is beause it is hooked up to the German grid. When the wind fails the Germans provide the power. The Germans rely mostly on coal plants although they now have a good solar power system (heavily incentivized) hooked up to the electric grid.

Energy Storage Incentives Approved by Congress

Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:29:58 -0500

The big problem with green technologies is their inherent instability. Putting these green tech in the grid will make the system unstable. To counter this instability requires massive storage capacities, and I mean massive. Has anyone done a calculation on the magnitude required and compare it to what can be manufactured (batteries)? To make it work, we need two types of peaking power -- one from solar and wind and the second from the curent gas fired peakers. This is cost duplication.

In our power system today, we use peaking generators which are powered by natural gas or LNG. They ramp up fast and shut down as quick so it tracks demand nicely...making for a very stable electric grid. What wind and solar power will do is burden the system with additional cost for good base power and gas peakers will still be needed to back up the 'greens' inherent shortcomings. This will make our electric system much more expensive to run and users will have to pay lots more for duplicate 'green' power.

What will these storage batteries cost us in terms of overall wate generation in their manufacture? All the chemicals we use to make solar cells and battery cells add to our pollution. Anyone done an accounting of environmental impact yet? Obama is going headlong on this with out doing a comprehensive environmental study on a macro (world) scale.

Have people noticed that Obama's plan does not address the continued massive CO2 gas that coal fired plants generate 24/7? Looking at the big picture I see 'green energy' as perhaps addressing only the increase in power demand due to increasing US population and does not address at all our current consumption requirements which we must reduce to slow global warming.

Without addressing the need to replace coal fired units with nuclear power, we are not going to slow the exponentially rising CO2 green house gases we generate.

One thing more. Right now we are locating wind mills in windy locations. With global Warming - more correctly, Climate Change - the weather patterns has been drastically changing. The windy locations we now pick may not be as good 10 years from now.

Nationalizing the U.S. Banking Sector: There's No Choice

Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:43:41 -0500

I do not see why valuation of houses is a problem. Keep it simple. Use the prevailing values of houses in 1999 (one year after the repeal of the tried and true Glass-Steagal). Counties have this record... add 10% for homes built after 1999. The per square footage is available per location. The values of houses in 1999 were at sustainable levels and is even more valid in today's average income levels.

Using this valuations for bank takeovers, the homes can be sold with no risks to taxpayers. At this level of valuation, the houses will sell quickly and the prices will even go higher because of demand. The difference between 1999 and actual selling price, if positive, can be a shared benefit between the taken over bank and the taxpayers.

Competent Banking CEOs: They Do Exist

Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:17:17 -0500

The Treasury should stop playing around trying this and that schemes and prolong the agony and head towards a long term disaster, a.k.a. Japanese economy of the last 25 years.

Instead, use the proven and successful Swedish model and do a short term nationalization of troubled banks as Roubini explained yesterday in his great article (sorry, I do not have the link) on how to solve our economic morass.

We have gone thru 1 million foreclosures so far and six million more more to go in the next 3-4 years. We need to take quick and swift measures that will quickly hurdle over all these competing interests of politicians, legislators, powerful bank lobbies, etc. and solve the problem. Sure, it will wipe out investors and shareholders but without this swift measure, in the long run, everyone loses lots more.

Fixing the Banks: What Should Obama Do?

Thu, 22 Jan 2009 09:52:53 -0500

Good article. I agree we should not only put back the tried and true, born out of the 1929-1933 financial crisis, Glass Steagle Act but expand it as well to cover derivatives and swaps and whatever future financial instruments financial engineers come up with.

We should also put back the rights of the States to impose Usury Laws that limit the interest rates credit card issuers charge.

Lastly, the Community Redevelopment Act should be repealed. It is the one act that started this whole financial fiasco rolling.

Nuclear Energy and the Next American President

Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:37:37 -0500

Good article Mr. Banks. Please go one step further into the future.

Today's Nuclear Power Plant design is an interim system, relatively speaking. The more Permanent nuclear system - as in Perpetuity - is the Fast Breeder Reactor type of power plant. It can use the 'waste' fuel of today's Nukes and generate more fuel as it generates power. It is a good way to get rid of the 'waste' fuel. Conventional Nuke's uses only 4% of its fuel before removing them as waste. Waste fuel has 96% of power potential left....what a waste (no pun intended)! This the reason why France, the leader in Nuke power plants, is storing their waste in easily retreivable storage. Our nuclear scientists were addressing this technology until 1996 when Sec of Energy, under Clinton, cut it off.

Let us hope Obama appoints an Energy Secretary who understands and appreciate science and pushes to revive the research of 1996. Let us hope that if they do, that the scientists who were involved in those projects in 1996 can be coaxed back to continue where they left off. This is urgent energy security and global warming standpoint and we should not be starting from scratch again.

Obama, McCain and Offshore Drilling

Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:09:44 -0400

Loopy is...loopy! Who banned drilling along both coasts ..Dems. Who stopped the funding of the research into fast breeder reactors that can give us energy w/o endlessly...Dems. Who allowed the credit card companies to circumvent the usury laws we had up to the 70's...Dems in South Dakota. Who in the late 60's and early 70's were all agianst drilling in the North Slope of Alaska.....Dems. This goes on and on.

Let us vote for McCain/Palin and throw Obama/Biden/Pelosi/ out and get this country moving again!

ETF Update: Alternative Energy and the Power Grid

Fri, 05 Sep 2008 09:40:51 -0400

pondee. Traditionally, the utiities invested in the power grid they need to disrtribute the power they produce. In this case, the power to be distributed is across States and the companies that will do this has yet to be formed. It is a formidable challenge considering the myriad of regulations that have to be overcome.

The problem alone posed by environmentalist, naturalist, beautiful scenery specialists makes venture capitalist not even want to think about this area.

Only a crisis - in the same magnitude as the oil embargo of the early 70's - will get us moving to solve this problem. Sad but true.

If McCain gets elected, he could push this together with his oil drilling plan especially if he appoints Mitt Romney as his Energy Secretary.

No Joke: Google Introduces Its Chrome Browser With A Cartoon

Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:45:05 -0400

Google is showing once more how inovative they are.

The features discussed sounds like the features I have been looking for. I hope their anti-phishing, anti-malware scheme works. I also hope they monitor how many people opt to use the "incognito mode"...would be interesting what the statistics would show.

The Economics of Political Spin

Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:20:36 -0400

Correction to my above blog on Bush...

"He did NOT understand the consequences of a lot of bills that got to his desk so he signed them all

The Economics of Political Spin

Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:16:07 -0400

Please allow me to set some things straight here.

Reagan/Bush 1 passed on a big deficit to Cinton, but for a very good reason. It was needed to bring down the Soviet empire. An excellent return on investment indeed. This in turn (now with the world at peace) allowed Clinton to bring down the deficit.

Then, Clinton's administration, in it's ineptness, did not recognize the threat from Al-Queda and missed many opportunities to get rid of the group. Because of this we had 9/11 and Bush 2 had to address our vulnerabilities. This cost a lot of money, billions of deficit money, for it does not increase nor produce any products -- mostly just security services.

Bush further expanded the deficit by going into Iraq without understanding the consequences of conquering a country. He compounded this with his policy of getting as many people to own a house. These two actions is responsible for much of the financial problems we find ourselves in. Yes he has an MBA, but remember, he got it by just getting by. Intellectually, he is a light weight - incapable of thinking through a subject. Hence, on the two ventures, he did not have a plan after conquering Iraq, and he did not add to his expanding housing ownership policy that only people who had sufficient income should be given a loan. He did understand the consequences of a lot of bills that got to his desk so he signed them all....until the stem cell issue, his first veto that had little economic impact. Most of what he signed had big economic impact one of which is the limited milage improvement on CAFE standards .... hence, we are now in trouble with the high gas prices. He (including many Republicans) could not understand the science of Global Warming, hence did not push really hard on nuclear energy.

On McCain. He is doing the minimum to what he needs to do to get elected without compromising his philosophy too much. Once in office, he can pretty much be the maverick he is.by nature. Lately, he has shown that when he sees a problem, he will address it quickly. He has started advocating for building 45 nuclear plants but should he become President he will be calling for 100 or more. In contrast, Obama wants to solve the waste problem first as if it will take only a year or two to solve it (solutions will take a little longer to be proven and accepted), or he is really against it but does not want to say it.

McCain will be working hard to accomplish is goals in 4 years. He is not saying it for he does not want to become a lameduck President. He will get serious election reform passed, get rid of earmarks and work hard on lowering the deficit to balance the budget. He will set an energy policy for the country.

Two Takes on Obanomics

Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:43:02 -0400

Obama reminds me of the disastrous Jimmy Carter era - disastrous economy, high interest rates (today, still a record), failed foreign policies and a nation filling hopeless.

Jimmy Carter had a good team that beat a very respectable President Ford and got him elected to the Presidency. But his team had smarts only in winning elections but little smarts required in running a country. Georgia at that time was a relatively simple state to run and no exposure to international events. His team had no experience in running a large entity, let alone a country. Carter was a narrow visioned micromanager who got tied up in the multitude of problems landing on his desk daily.

In contrast, when Reagan became President, he took his highly experienced and competent team with him. The same team he had when he was Governor of California for 8 years. California was already a large State with plenty of International exposures. Reagan was a delegator and a visionary. He was very successful in his first term. However, some of his old reliables left after 4 years and his second term was not as good.

George Bush Sr was a successful President. He was Vice President for 8 years, had learned the job well and was well qualified when he took over. He had in place a good team who had worked well together for years under Reagan. He managed to complete bringing down the Soviet empire and beat back Saddam Hussain with little loss of American life. He lost to Clinton only because his campaign manager for his first election died during his second run for President.

Obama, should he become President, would be worse than Carter. Obama has never managed a State, City or an enterprise. Consequently, he has not built up a cadre of people who have proven competence and expertise that is needed in running the US government. He does not have a team of people who have worked together for years, with a proven record of making good decisions that affect millions of people. With him being very light in managing experience and global experience, a highly cohesive and competent team is essential. It will be very difficult for him to form such a team for the people who have the needed qualities will not want to be part of a team bound to fail. It is not worth their time and reputation. His only resource will be a team formed from his campaign organization. Just like Carter's, a team good at winning an election but terrible in running a government. Would we want for this to happen...make the US government as Obama's training grounds? We should reject this kind of change.

McCain is a seasoned veteran. He knows the issues and has the correct solutions. He is Maverick enough to do what is right for our country regardless of what his party thinks. He has people who are of proven competence and honesty around him that will form his team. Add to this his nominating Romney as his VP. Now, Romney has a proven successful track record of running a big State (MA) and big businesses that requires vision. He will bring his cadre of people to run the US government. McCain and Romney is the team our country needs during this hard times to bring order and sanity once more.

In 2002 and 2004 Olympics and in-between, we have seen the USA Basketball Team loaded with superstars fall to other countries. Great players individually, but did not play as a team. In 2008 we had an Olympic team of great players who have 3 years playing together and we won the gold! The US needs a Team of competent people running our government or we wind up losing to China, Russia and even Iran and North Korea.

Obama Is Bad for the Economy - Barron's

Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:32:43 -0400

Let us start by defining the basis fo my instinct -- a combination/cummulatio... of my education, broad experience, natural intellect, life long learning, observations, historical studies - for the last 67 years.

On Bush. During the primaries of 1999 my instinct told me he will not be a good President for he is an intellectual lightweight and is too reliant on his newly acquired religious beliefs. I was right. He was not intelligent enough to counter his advisors arguments and he hired people who had the same religious leanings as his - instead of the most competed people.

We have seen the results: launched war on the Iraq without a Plan on what to do after the invasion. Appointed incompetents such as Brown of FEMA, Gonzales, etc., (thank goodness we avoided Harriet Miers), fired US Attys who were doing well but were not in the same religious vein, allowed US car companies to resist stricter mileage standards, allowed mortgage companies to give loans to people who cannot afford it because he believed that every family should own a house without regard to their financial capabilities.

Lesson we should learn from the Bush years here is - do not elect an intellectual light weight who has a very narrow experience in world history and economics and who relies on his religion to carry him through.

On Obama: my instinct tells me he is another intellectual light weight who has little knowledge of world history, no experience in economics, a racial (well hidden) agenda and radical (again well hidden) beliefs, but because he is a smart and convincing talker, is very dangerous.

We do not know a whole lot about him but we do know enough to be very leary. From his writings and past behavior, we know he truely believes in what his Pastor J Wright says (he denies this cause he knows people will not elect him if he does not), he has no problem associating with seedy characters if it is to his benefit (Rizzo) and he enjoyed associating with radicals. In short, his moral values and principles in life are less than honorable. In grey situations, he will not have a strong moral compass to guide him in making correct decisions. This is very dangerous for the US and the world. Obama will be another Jimmy Carter and we do not want to go that route again.

On McCain: my instinct tells me he is a very principled man (plenty of historical evidence to support this), who will fight the establishment when necessary (again plenty of past actions in the Senate to support this) in order to force honesty and fairness on his fellow senators and congressmen. From the way he answers questions, I can see he is an honest person whose high moral values will (if he becomes President)make him go after companies and individuals who are crooks such as Ken Lay, Mozillo, Merrill Lynch, etc. I see him as one who will try to make put a limit in interest rates on credit cards like it was 25 years ago.

If he becomes President, I see him lowering our dependence on foreign oil and addressing Global Warming in a very serious and significant way. If he becomes a two term President, he will see the resolution before he leaves office.

Intellectually, he has the capability to argue with anyone he encounters. Just as important, a willingness to consult others if the subject of the arguement is beyond his know how. He could be the President who could bring back fiscal discipline to Congress. If he chooses Romney who has a very good business acument, that would be a big plus.

I see McCain as someone who is strong enough to be respected by world leaders like Putin that future wars will be avoided.

On Reagan and Bush 1: Reagan's greatest achievement that the world should be greatfull for is he started the collapse of te Soviet Union. It was Bush 1 who finished it (but got little recognision for it). Without him, Reagan would not have looked as good.

On Clinton: people forget Bush 1 through his good decisions, already had the economic recovery started when Clinton took over. But Clinton took the credit. The economy and the internet bubble was already heading down before Clinton left office and Bush 2 got the blame. Clinton was the one who missed gettting Bin Laden.

The Georgian Crisis: Impact on ETFs?

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:58:21 -0400

TRUE, (your name is a misnomer) I saw the blownup bridge both in print and in the news taken by newpeople on the ground. The Russians want to control the oil flowing to the West so they can manipulate the price. They have enjoyed seeing their coffers balloon with $140/bbl oil and want more. Besides, they enjoy seeing the West squirm helplessly as they twist balls. Power and control is the name of their game. They want their old Russian glory back just like the good old days.

This is why we need to drill for oil and do it fast. This is also why we should follow T Boone Pickets' lead and free up CNG for our vehicles. This is why we need to build more nukes to provide reliable electrical power. This is why we need to revive nuclear research on fast breeder reactors which can provide us with electric power forever.

China's New Car Tax Could Make Luxury Cars an Endangered Species

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:53:21 -0400

Mercedes has been selling a small two seater for several years in EU and introduced it here last year. It has been selling very well for several months. Name escapes me right now.

The Benefits of Shifting to CNG for Fuel

Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:16:33 -0400

paulk8756 you did not mention the long term solution to our energy problem...fast breeder nuclear power plants. All the ground work is done, just needs a prototype built (ready since 1998) to prove it to people and determine the best design. Because they produce more fuel than they consume, it is a perpetual machine. With these type of plants, we will have all the electric power we need , rain or shine, day or night....and no C02 generated.

By the way, Shaw Group just announced they are building 4 westinghouse produced nukes in China and have them producing power in 6 years. If we could only get rid of our non-technical legislators (the Pelosi/Reid types) and environmentalist who keep clinging to 20 year old technological conditions.

Does Al Gore Finally Get It?

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:59:21 -0400

Fitzman. The equivalent energy we use daily of all oil, gas and coal is 200 million bbl of oil. For non-global warming believers and the scientifically challenged, here are are some Q & A to ponder. This equivalent 200mm barrels daily, when combusted creates 10 times plus amount of CO2 that plants and trees can photosynthesize daily. The unused amount accumulates in our atmosphere daily. I takes years to feel the effect but it is there creeping up at all of us slowly.

To put it in undestandable terms. When you run your car inside a closed garage, CO will accumulate and in about 20 to 30 minutes you will die from carbon monoxide poisoning.

The earth is like a big super duper enclosed garage enclosed by the forces of gravity. At the rate we are burning fossil fuels, it will be about 80 to 100 years before most animals (includes humans) on earth will choke and die. However, this will never happen. why? Because in a few years time, within the next 10-20 years, the climate pattern on earth would have changed so much that our ciites will experience more and more extreme weather like more powerful typhoons, tornadoes and hurricanes, more dry weather in formerly moderate areas and more extremely wet in other areas causing flooding and drought where there it has not happened before. There will be extreme snow fall but for short periods in some areas. Weather patterns will change at a rate much faster than people can adjust. The result - less harvests in farm lands, flooded cities, destroyed man made structures everywhere. This has been happening for a number of years now. An example of this is the Mississippi which is flooding again only 13 years after the last one. The cycle is getting shorter all the time as we continue to burn hydrocarbon.

With all these changes comes changes in insects and diseases. More of them are moving north as the weather pattern shifts. Diseases will cause more people to get sick and/or die.

I other words, the people population on earth (the root cause of climate change) will start to decline and the CO2 generation will decline with it. The earth will self correct our man generated excesses.

How do we prolong the good living on earth as we know it today and pass it on to our next generation? Start reducing our consumption of hdrocarbons fast and bring down the population growth to a more sustainable level. Who decides where the sustainable level is? Mother nature will determine that of course!

Gas Lines Coming This Fall

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:23:54 -0400

Bush and McCain call for allowing the drilling the offshore areas around the US now. Democrats and environmentalist are against it calling it a useless idea because it will not help bring the price of gas down immediately. OK. So what do they suggest we do? Build more solar and wind turbines. This too take time and will not lower the price immediately. Producing electric cars and hybrids take time too. Everything takes time. So why not drill now and hope that oil is found in large quantities and build the pipelines needed. Meanwhile, hope the oil producers do not squeeze the supply, cause a big shortage and gas go up to $8-10/gal, and in turn, cause food and gas riots.

As T. Boone Pickens pointed out, it is insane for the US to be importing 70%. If do not drill now, in 5 years we will be up to 80-85% dependent on imports....and $8-10/gal gas.

Obama and the Democrats and Environmentalists oposes nuclear power because accoding to them we do not know how to handle the waste. OK. So do they propose a massive research to eliminate the waste? No. They consider nuclear waste an unsolvable problem and therefore will do nothing. They do not even bother to see why France supplies 80% of its needs from nuclear and is now building another nuclear power plant to raise it even higher.

Americans, wakeup! The Democrats and Environmentalist are leading the country down the path of economic collapse. We have to throw the bums out in November.

What's Keeping the Dollar Down?

Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:31:44 -0400

The main problem with the dollar falling is we are, as well reasoned in the article, in deep debt. Why? Because we have government leaders and CEO's who care more about themselves (reelection for the politicians and getting to be mega rich for the CEO's) than the country. I came here to the US in the mid 60's and I have watched the sad change.

It used to be politicians would do what was good for themselves but also what was good for the country and the people. When there was a conflict, they put country first. Same thing with CEO's. They went after profits but knew when to stop if it was bad for the country. Look at all the earmarks being spent. Hundreds of millions of dollars on a bridge in Alaska that benefits 50 people. When questioned, Alaska Senator Stevens shamelessly defend it. Same thing with the Senator Byrd from Virginia. This are just two examples. How about Cunningham and a few more who are now in jail for their greed. Mozillo of Countrywide. He built his company by inducing people to buy homes that he knew fully well, the subprime people could not afford. In the old days, the banker would ask a few questions and when he senses you are not qualified, he turned you down right there. Never mind that he does not earn a fee; he knows the right way from the wrong way of doing business. Take GM, what used to be the biggest US company. They stayed with manufacturing big, highly profitable cars, SUVs, Hummers and pickups until they started loosing billions of dollars this year. They neglected the small car markets all these years and now have to scamble but, may not survive. They had no Plan B. Yet, they were paid millions in salaries and options to think! A bunch of greedy and stupid dummies. To top it all, there is no talk at all of ousting them!

But, the blame does not rest solely with them. The voters (and those who decide not to vote) too should take the blame. They voted for these crooked selfish politicians. Now voters have a chance to correct the situation but they are voting the wrong way. They are leaning towards Obama who has not shown nor proven that when push comes to shove, he will put the country first. McCain has been tested -- he tried to put a crimp on special interests with his McCain Feingold act, he has worked to limit or eliminate earmarks, he chose to stay in Vietnamese jail and prolong his suffering rather than be freed while his fellow American soldiers remain in jail. He cares deeply for his country and can be counted on to do his best to protect it. Americans need to wake up. Obama is amateur hour like George Bush II; we do not need another 4 years of poor leadership. Where are our leaders like FDR, Truman, Reagan, Bush Sr. -- who put country first? How come we have so many Mozillo's, Grasso's, Ken Lays' and very few CEOs like Bill Gates and W. Buffet. When have we seen two richest Americans pour thier billions on improving the health of mankind? Bush Jr should award them the nations' highest honor before the end of his term.

Denison Mines: A Play on Escalating Uranium Demand

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:52:11 -0400

Had Carter let the breeder program go on up to the building and testing of a prototype, his questions would never get an answer. Proof of concept was needed and to address unanticipated problems as well as refine ideas. When this is all done, then the production proceeds. This is how new ideas get implemented. This is how the current nuclear plant designs got atarted and as you will concede, is working very well.

There are designs that addresses the terrorist and nuclear proliferation issues. We need cooperation beween all the world's nuclear scientists to address these issues. We cannot just go on and say it cannot be done. The alternative is Global Warming and the demise of the human civilization. Oh, people will not completely disappear from earth. It is probably safe to speculate that 5 % who are hardy and live in favorable locations will survive.

This should not really my concern for I will be around perhaps for only another 20 years.

Denison Mines: A Play on Escalating Uranium Demand

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:10:55 -0400

In response to john s. gordon, the next generation will come up with breeder reactors that use us the spent uranium today we consider waste. We only utilize 4% of the energy in the fuel in today's reactor designs. Research on breeder reactors (stopped by Carter, revived by Reagan, stopped again by Clinton) will develop reactors that will not only consume the remaining 96% but also 'breed' more fuel. Less waste will be produced and we will be generating electricity for ever and ever, until infinity.

The Indians, Chinese and Russians are into this research now. The Americans? They are still mulling over the 3 mile island accident where no one had died and hardly disrupted lives of people living around the plant.

The fires in Northern California and heavy rains and floods in midwest today will, in a few years, be looked back at as a consequence of weather patterns being altered by global warming. Yet, we delay using nuclear technology which is the only answer to furutre global warming related disasters. Unfounded fears and stupidity is what will do in the human civilization.

All of the Motor-Fuel Alternatives to Conventional Crude Oil Stink

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 11:30:08 -0400

You lumped all nuclear as one. Wrong, very wrong.

One type that just needs a short time to develop and bit of funding (Jimmy Carter cut it off, Reagan revived it, Clinton cut it out again) are fast breeder reactors. This is what we need and when we have it, it will give limitless (almost) electric power. This will give us power for our electric cars, electric trains and home and industry electric power day and night, for low cost. Fuel is reused so there is little waste. And no C02 produced.

A Closer Look at Obamanomics

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 13:05:52 -0400

Several observations:

1)This article's title is a misnomer. Does not tell anthing about what NObama believes in (does he strongly believe in anything other than he should be the next US President?).

2)NObama showed does not understand basic economics nor human behavior when he proposed to impose windfall profit tax on the oil companies. Does he not know that companies just pass on the payment of taxes to the consumer's or if they can't, they do all they can to maintain their profits or make more? Does he not know that companies are in business to make money an those that don't soon close-up?

3)Does NObama ever study history? Carter did a lot of stupid economic moves that resulted in the US economy tanking, drowning in high interest rates, and NObama wants to do the same. Sure he was only in his teens when this all happened, but when one wants to be President of the US, the largest country in the world (economically speaking), one has to study history or wind up repeating the same mitakes.

Being a great speaker but being ill prepared to manage a big country does not make a good President. Woe unto us if we allow him to be President. For our own good and for our country, we should all work hard to prevent him from becoming our next President.

What Can Possibly Explain the Price of Oil?

Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:15:20 -0400

When, not if, the Israeli's attack the nuclear facilities in Iran two things may happen ---

1) Fanatics in Iran sink one or two tankers in the Persian Gulf cutting off oil exports from Gulf oil producers -- Kuwait, Iran, UAE and Qatar. But not completely. Shallow draft small tankers can still go through. Crude oil goes up to $200 or more, temporarily. The Saudis will ship 5 million bbls/day of their oil via pipeline to the red sea. Iraq ship via Turkey. Iran and Kuwait have no such alternative for exporting their oil. Consumers are already cutting back on their use so a price spike will not hurt the world economy too badly. Non-oil producing countries but oil dependent, with large populations like Pakistan, Egypt will hurt most.

2) Level headed Iranian Mullahs prevail and tankers continue plying the gulf. The leadership figures that if they blockaded the gulf, Iran will be the first to suffer. Their oil revenue will plummet, people lose their means of earning a living and revolt, and the mullahs lose power. Surely, with strong self interest in mind, the level headed Mullahs will not allow blockage of the Straight of Hormuz.

However, whether it is scenario 1 or 2, bombing of Iran will send shock waves to the market and oil will spike to $200+ for a few days and come back down. Nothing to worry about long term. Suicide bombers will try to do damage to the world but the world security forces are already operating around to world now so damage will be limited unlike pre-911.

In the long run the world will benefit from this sir strike. If there is a good time for this event, it will be after the Olympics.

Is Oil a Bubble? Part Two

Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:44:17 -0400

Facts:
1)The end of cheap oil started with Katrina.
2)The world's rapid unsustainable population growth is accelerating
3)Human activities is dumping CO2 into the atmosphere so much global warming is accelerating.

How can mankind sustain human existence on Earth?
1) Start reducing population growth -- one child per family for everyone.
2) Switch power generation from coal to nuclear; accelerate research into long term handling of nuclear waste.
3) Start switching to electric power for cars, heating, cooking, office HVAC
4) Accelerate installation of wind and solar power generators
5) Accelerate development of fast breeder reactors
6) Eliminate extreme religious beliefs to make the world a safer to live in.