Formula-E Racing Cars

I guess, possibly, someone read my post about racing of electric cars.  They call the cars Formula-E (as apposed to Formula-1, etc).  It is somewhat limited though.  They only have a range of a little over a hundred miles.  There is no allowance for recharging the batteries during the race.  Clearly, it would take too long.  I have no idea how many will watch it, but I still wonder about the lack of noise.  I mean, that’s sort of why some people go to the races.

Nonetheless, it appears that the electric cars are making into the world of auto racing.

On another front, I checked with my car insurance agent to see if there are any special consideration for electric cars.  Apparently, there aren’t any, but the agent wasn’t really sure.  Of the hundreds of customers he has, none have electric cars.  Maybe that says something about them.

Removing All Doubt

Again the old saying is proven true.  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez opened her mouth and proved herself beyond all doubt that she is really dumb.  Not only is Nancy Pelosi not a racist, but she has used the label on others likely before AOC was old enough to realize it.  It goes to prove that she completely deserves the label of dummycrat.

To be sure, I am somewhat glad that AOC called Pelosi a racist.  It will give Pelosi firsthand knowledge of what it is like to be wrongfully plastered with the label.  Maybe Nancy will be a little more careful about improperly using the label.  However, I’m not holding out much hope on that.  According to the woman, all Republicans deserve the label, especially when they are African-American.

Electric VW Van?

I noticed the advertisement for the new VW van.  It looks pretty impressive.  I tried to get some info on it.  I just might try to buy one, as long as the price isn’t too high.  The problem is that I don’t know how expensive it will be.

I had one of the old vans.  My wife and I really liked it.  Unfortunately,  I could not afford to rebuild the engine every other year.  Also, the heater left a lot to be desired.  Even in southern California weather, the heater was very deficient.  it was worse when I went up to Big Bear Lake where we about froze.

I must admit, though, it handled the snow very well.  I drove through 8 and 9-inch snow with ease.  I was a little scared that we would get stuck, but the van just kept right on going.

Also, I must put a good word in for the dealership in Alburqurque.  While traveling, we drove into the dealership at 4:45 PM with a bad coil and left at 5:30 with a good one.  Never figured on that.  And, by the way, the price was reasonable too.

If I had one more complaint, there was no A/C.  If there was, I suspect the engine would have carried the load.  Push come to shove, the one fault the vehicle had was an undersized engine.

I knew a guy that put a Porche engine in one.  The engine hung out the back, but he said he had no lack for power.  Still, I imagine keeping the cabin warm was difficult.

I have often wondered why VW never really attacked the power/heat problem.  I don’t know.  maybe this one will.

At any rate, when they release the electric version, I will take a serious look at it, especially if they can keep the price around 30 K.  If they can come up with some solutions for battery charging problems, I will definately take a serious look.  If the dumb politicians keep talking of increasing the gas taxes, the sales contract is as good as signed.

A Good Thing?

If we send illegal aliens south

Wouldn’t that decrease the number of coming north?

Wouldn’t that be a good thing?

Actually, it would be a good thing for them too.  They wouldn’t needlessly risk their lives and lose their fortunes for naught.  It just might decrease the smuggling of drugs and I would think that would be a good thing too.

However, it would seem the dummycrats have it wrong again.  They think it would be bad and inhumane.  Truly, the best thing they can do is fix things in their own country instead of coming up here and destroying ours.

Tell me.  To where do we run when the US is destroyed?

P. S. I’m still waiting for an answer to my question, how does a drone stop someone from crossing the border?  For that matter, I have not heard one other person ask the question, not even Fox News, not even Hannity.  I don’t understand, it seems such an obvious question.

Decrease the Costs of Healthcare

If you really want to cut the cost of healthcare, one way you can go about it is to keep the lawyers out of it.  Doctors have to pay a great deal for malpractice insurance.  Let me restate that.  We who visit doctors pay a great deal for malpractice insurance.  It is a cost of business for doctors and we pay every bit of that cost.

Well, that is not totally true.  Most of us don’t pay the doctor.  We pay insurance companies and the insurance companies pay the doctor.  Regardless of how many hands it goes through, it is our dime that pays for that doctor to keep his practice.  Even if the cost is paid by an employer, it is part of our pay package.  In a way, when the payment is made through other means, it is worse.  By isolating us from the knowledge of the cost, we remain ignorant of just how much is paid for that visit to the doctor because we have sniffles.

It wouldn’t be so bad, but in most malpractice lawsuits, the doctor is not even at fault.  However, the insurance company usually settles to avoid paying legal fees as well as the off chance that the jury improperly awards the case to the plaintiff.  Let us face it.  Paying ten-thousand for sure appears better than possibly paying ten-million.  So the lawyer gets forty percent of ten-thousand, four thousand for simply threatening to sue.

When it happens in small numbers, it isn’t any big thing.  However, there are lawyers that make their fortunes making such lawsuits, even though they know that they would lose the suit should it go to trial.  So you and I pay no-good-bums to sue good doctors without good cause.

If the lawsuits were not permitted, thousands of lawyers would have to find another line of work and the price of healthcare would plummet.

Unfortunately, that is not all of it.  Everyone knows about defensive medicine.  There are many doctors that order tests that serve no purpose other than to keep out of court.

Then there are the medicines.  A pharmacology company spends money and years to come up with a new drug that serves a very important purpose.  Then, after all the testing and all, they finally release the drug so that they can start realizing a profit.  Then, one week later, some lawyer takes the company to court in hopes of getting a big settlement out of it.

It happens all the time.  One day I hear of a new drug that really helps and within a week, the advertisement comes on TV, “If you took (whatever the drug is) and suffered (whatever the problem is) then contact (whoever the lawyer is) and we will make you a millionaire.  (And, by the way, we will become a billionaire.  And, by the way, we will drive the cost of meds up roughly thirty to forty percent.)

Lest you get the wrong idea, I am not advocating completely taking the lawyers out of medicine.  It would be a horrible idea.  However, we really need to take a long hard look at our tort system.  Indeed, it would be a good idea to look at it in general, not just the world of medicine.  Everything we buy includes legal fees.  Worse, there are some products that never make it to the market because of lawyers.

My suggestion is that the lawyers should be held to a higher standard.  I don’t know how it would be, but lawyers who do such things should have their licenses pulled and they should be fined.  If we could figure out a way to do it, the cost of medicine, as well as other things, would immediately drop.  Not only that; I wouldn’t have to listen to those ridiculous commercials.  TV and radio would have to find a replacement for their programming.

Unfortunately, I don’t hold out much hope for anything to be done.  The lawyers make the laws.  They benefit from them.  I doubt that they will do anything that will decrease their fortunes.

The Truth About Government

If I may, I would like to make a statement based on something I heard Dr. J. Vernon McGee made one time.

The best government in the hands of bad people is horrid.  Even, it will tend to get worse.

The worst government in the hands of good, God-fearing people will tend to be good.  Moreover, it will tend to get better.

Keeping this in mind, is it better to put the control of the government in the hands of people who want to destroy our government as we know it.  After all, even Obama promised hope and change.  I didn’t see much hope but I saw a lot of change… all in the wrong direction.  Do we really want to repeat that mistake and put the country of communists or are we going to learn from the last mistake?

Public Schools

When our forefathers set up our government, they did a wonderful job.  There are a few suggestions I have for a change to the constitution, but by and large, they did a much better job than I ever would.  It would stand to reason they had a good look at what they didn’t want.

Unfortunately, I do believe they overlooked one major thing.  I can understand it.  It could not have been foreseen in the day.  The hitch is that now it is very likely too late.  It would seem that the federal government has crept into our education system.

They gave us the first amendment to keep the government out of publishing papers.  However, when the government controls what is taught in our schools and colleges, it really amounts to the same thing.  Our education system is horrible at teaching as compared to most developed nations.  On the other hand, it is very good at indoctrinating.  Worse yet, they are bound and determined to prevent private schools wherever possible.

The instant that anyone brings up the possibility of a penny going to a private school, it is about the same sound as when I accidentally step on my dog’s tail.  They don’t even want any money paid toward such private schools being tax deductible.  As such, people who do send their children to private schools end up paying twice.

Certainly, there are two reasons they don’t want private schools to thrive.  Already, statistics show that kids who go to private schools, or those that are homeschooled, do so much far better.  Their academic measures are better in every way.  Also, they are generally better citizens.

To add to the indictment of the public schools, the private schools provide the better education at about half the costs.  Certainly, the NEA does not want that getting around.

If students that normally do poorly were to be put into private schools and they suddenly started doing well, it would really give the public schools a black eye.  They certainly would not want that.

Worse yet, they would never get a chance to indoctrinate any student permitted to go to private school.  It would take them out of the reach of the NEA and the government.  Now you know why the government wants your children in their schools.  And woe to the parent who complains about them being indoctrinated.  And woe to anyone who complains about the public system.