Friday, February 24, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Tony's Take: Give Credit Where Credit is Due
Let me make this clear on the outset: I loathe the electric car. I hate everything about them and their retarded brother’s known as hybrid drive vehicles. I have never been able to wrap my head around why environmentalists love those stupid things so much when there are two very apparent facts. 1: Electric cars pull their power from the grid meaning they do have emissions (how many people I have yelled that fact at very red faced) 2: They have less range than a professional bicyclist meaning the electric car is less useful than a contraption you can buy at Wal-Mart for $50. Finally with the stupid little hybrid they are beaten by the fact they get the same gas mileage as a diesel car and they lose their ability to charge relatively quickly rendering them worthless within the decade.
Now here is where I must give my credit. I learned about the Fisker. It uses the same principle as a Diesel locomotive in that the combustion engine on board is used only as a generator of electricity for the electric motor. I must say: this is Genius. You can actually claim very low emissions with this method a generator uses very little fuel to charge the batteries. On top of that the Fisker can accelerate pretty quickly (unfortunately lacking a high top speed). Other than the fact it panders to the very environmentalists I want to beat the hell out of, I have no complaints about it.
Unfortunately, I must break my own rule of “be consistent” because I am reminded the Chevrolet Volt uses the same technology, and I HATE the Chevy Volt. Now to be honest it does have to do with more factors other than the fact that it has looks only a mother could love, and it is slower than my obese dog. Now the major problems start to arise Most importantly Chevrolet is a subsidiary of Government…I mean…General Motors, a company that received at Multi-Billion Dollar Bailout, has just posted a massive profit for the year and is yet to give me, or any other American our $158.24 each. Now they are making a car no one wants and happened to shove advertisements on during the super bowl (thus wasting more of my $158.24 I am owed). At least they had the decency to sneak in the phrase “It is what America had to build.”
But then Again… Fisker also received a loan from the Federal Government towards their Green initiative. The Initiative funded other companies like Solyndra who is currently under investigation for Fraud after they closed shop almost immediately after receiving their loan (and never paying it back). This reminds me why I hate these Eco companies who try to shove a product on the market no one wants. At least I can regain my consistency by saying until I am paid my $159.93 (GM and Fisker’s Money Combined) back, there is nothing to like about these cars.
I must reiterate though: the technological idea is still awesome despite the fact I do not know if I can ever give up my internal combustion powered car.
But that is just my take…
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Friday, February 17, 2012
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Tony's Take: Be Consistent
We have all heard the line “consistency is key.” Whether it is in sports when you are talking about a basketball player’s free throw percentage, or a referee’s ability to ignore the Aaron Rogers rules of football (if you don’t know what I am talking about just know if you poke Aaron Rogers it is a penalty). It could also be the politician who is against gay marriage while being secretly gay himself, or the Billionaire calling for higher taxes for the rich while being accused of dodging taxes himself, or If I knew anything about the entertainment industry I bet I could find an example there as well. There is also another definition of consistency: when it is your job to enforce a rule, actually making punishments that do not break the rule itself.
Of course, this is when I bring the story. In Hoke County North Carolina a United States Department of Agriculture representative (agent? Enforcer? I have no idea what to call them) went to a local school to inspect the lunches of pre-school students and decide if they abide by USDA guidelines for a healthy meal. Needless to say, none of the packed lunches were deemed to be healthy. Ignoring how I feel about a government bureaucrat with no accountability to the voting public being allowed to make guidelines on how we feed our children there is one massive problem with the situation. The lunch given to the children to replace their “unhealthy” meals were chicken nuggets.
Even with that information this already seems ridiculous. Under whose definition is a chicken nugget, chicken covered in bread crumbs, then FRIED IN OIL healthy? Now to make matters worse let me tell you the meal given to the child by her mother: “…a turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, apple juice and potato chips…” along with the explanation that the mother did not include vegetables because the daughter will not eat them without the mother watching, and does not want to waste money on food… seems legit to me.
This is ridiculous, now along with the unhealthy main course of this pre-schooler’s lunch; she is now being told it is healthier than a TURKEY SANDWICH. Oh Timmy the firecrackers are too dangerous, here blow up this pipe-bomb instead. I know I am exaggerating, but that is literally the line of reasoning you have to go through to think the same thing this agent thought. This is where I remind us of a need for consistency. If the child was given a salad without dressing and some lawn clippings, I would only have the political foot to stand on here (which can be debated of course), but with this you cannot tell me chicken nuggets are healthier than a turkey sandwich.
But that is just my take…
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Friday, February 10, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)