| Dying LJ |
|
|
| 06:30am 05/03/2013 |
| |
I don't post to this as often as I used to anymore. I still come by every once in awhile for communities and such, but it seems as if the posts are mostly automated twitter feeds or feeds from sites I go to anyway such as Flayrah. I only have 1 friend who posts with any regularity so as far as my own contibution to LJ I'll probably be ending this here. It's been a good 8 years since I started. LJ was probably the first online community I posted my thoughts to. Despite these ups and down the world moves on.
It's been three months since my last post here, I think that shows it's time to call it dead.
Remember to catch me on my other sites:
Flayrah: http://www.flayrah.com/u/sonious
FurAffinity: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/sonious/
SoFurry: https://sonious.sofurry.com/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Tantroo_McNally
I'll still be posting comments here and there, but for entries it's as good a time as any to sign off.
Getting the hop outta here,
Tantroo Sonious McNally |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| Now with video |
|
|
| 09:08pm 03/12/2012 |
| |
BEHOLD, I transform my boring text into boring videos!
|
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| Bipolar |
|
|
| 06:19pm 14/11/2012 |
| |
So something did happen to me, and I had a manic episode. Long, interesting but long, story short I have had an interesting past few days, but now in a more calm state of mind I can tell you. I have bipolar disorder and I'm now taking medication to help calm the imbalance.
It took quite a bit go that to happen. During my manic episode the cops were called, I was tasered, I went nuts. Thankfully they were all smart enough to get me the help I need and my family was still there for me. Now I have collected my thoughts and the schizophrenia that had taken hold at its worst time is quashed. I started to believe it was me against the world, nothing is farther from the truth. People are good and fearful, not evil and conniving.
Because I understand this I have hope, and that's what it takes to get past mental illness. Thank you all, and thanks goes to all who have shown me love and support over the years |
|
| |
|
Read 2 - Post |
| |
| End of the Tax War |
|
|
| 05:44am 08/11/2012 |
| |
So this idea just popped in there, it won't go away, and I think it's effecting my ability to sleep because I was reading over fiscal policies and it just clicked for some reason, and that is how to end the Fiscal cliff stand off.
Obama will get his repeal of Bush Tax cuts for over 500,000 (I think it was that number's gone up and down), but then what do the Republicans get? Don't they have to worry about Norquist's pledge of never raising taxes EVER or get kicked out of office?
Here's the thing, Norquist and people like him aren't fools, they know that a signing statement is only as good as the people who are alive to sign it. I doesn't reassure that our children's politicians can't raise taxes, Democrat or Republican. So how about making Norquist's constitutional amendment? If that won't earn forgiveness I don't know what will.
FISCAL PEACE AMENDMENT
- Federal income tax and payroll tax may never again be increased nor decreased. Tax brackets may be changed but ONLY for the purposes of inflation and deflation of currency.
Wait... not decreased? Why? To prevent a Bushism from happening again and being permanent. It is a double line in the sand. There are going to be some Republicans who have the pipe dream of no income tax that will hate it, but there are also going to be some Democrats who have the pipe dream of taxing all corporate profits that also hate it. It's time to remove the pipe from both of these mouths and send this message. We want a government that works, so if Obama is sure that this tax increase will fix these problems, then fine but this will be the last time taxes are on the table.
But there are many other reasons Republicans should love this Amendment:
There will be other tax fights in the future, what deductions you get and sales taxes on particular items. However Americans will sleep soundly knowing this is the rate you'll be taxed, forever and ever, Amen. Small businesses won't worry about increases on the federal level they can concentrate on running their businesses, the tax of fighting about taxes will be alleviated at the federal level.
The amendment will assure that the only way to effectively increase income tax in the future at the federal level will be fiscal responsibility in the form of deflation. It's important that the government help people understand this as it could get people upset that their taxes are effectively "going up" when they really aren't.
There, financial crisis solved, yawn, next. |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| Libertarians could make a killing in NY District 24 |
|
|
| 08:18pm 01/11/2012 |
| |
I looked over a hotly contested battle for congress in our district. Ann Marie Beurkle VS Dan Maffei.
If there was any symbolic battle which shows the one version of evil versus another it is this one. If you take the stereotypes both positive and negative for both parties you'll see these two. The major irony of this election is that both have served in congress once before. In fact the last battle was against the same two people.
So who is running against these two? Just one, the Green Party. On the news there is already a report of a Republican supported making a large contribution to the Green candidate. The Green party candidate responded by giving the money to progressive charities with the claim she didn't want to be used in that way. As a move I find that admirable, the problem is that unlike the President election which I plan on voting Gary Johnson to help his party achieve 5% needed to become a new party, the battle between the two is too close.
On the other hand... When looking between the two, I can't choose:
Beurkle is the incumbent, she has a history of being staunchly socially conservative, however during her tenure things like gay marriage passed in the state, she's certainly not Bachmann like and seems to hold that under her sleeve in the present, her personal voting record doesn't include any gay rights (for or against). In fact one of the abortion bill she did co-sponsor which makes "fetal discrimination" illegal could possibly be amended in the future to protect fetus's from being aborted because of sexual orientation once we are able to do it (currently only for physical gender and race). This willingness to not obsess over such social believes is something which I feel should be rewarded when a Republican does it.
Dan Maffei, during his tenure there was a lot of economic problems in the area, we lost alot of jobs, add to that when he was voted out (losing to Buerkle) he gave bonuses to his staff up to 200K. He did do alot of pro-GLBT votes. However there is another problem and that is there is no opportunity to see him debate his opponent because he chose not to show up citing that it will be a free style format. In fact the debate will be between the Republican and the Green party candidate, the democrat will not show up. This is extremely unusual, and even if the free-style format isn't something Maffei may like, I'm sure Beurkle wouldn't like it either but she has the courage to show up despite it being equally unfair.
So I think I'll watch this debate between the Green Party candidate and the Republican Candidate. Depending on what I'll be probably be picking them, but Maffei has really low chances. It'll also be interesting to see a Green party candidate go mono a mono with a Republican Candidate in a debate. That's really a rare treat.
I feel the reason this election is so close is because either person elected will go against half of what Syracuse stands for. It's a city which is industrious and believe in fiscal responsibility our cost of living is low which attracts people who spend practically on where they live, even if it's not as ascetically pleasing as other cities, and sometimes snowy. We are socially democratic, we are pro-GLBT, and stand by treating people equally.
I have seen Ron Paul stickers and poster signs in the nearby area during the primaries. If the Libertarian Party is looking for a good place where they might gain some ground, I think they would find my district very welcoming in the future. I have no doubt this race is tight because of the "good pieces" of the Democrats and Republican has left this as nothing more then a party match. If you attack with the best of both worlds you'll succeed. I think Libertarians would do well for themselves to get involved in upstate districts, I wouldn't doubt you'd go pretty far. |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| How much in Diamonds? |
|
|
| 07:05pm 11/10/2012 |
| |
So a diamond planet was discovered, but just how much bank are we talking here? Well I'm going to do my best and get my dusty math brain clicking again to attempt to calculate how much in diamonds could be harvested if at all possible (which it's not... so...)
Reports say it's "twice as big as earth." which is pretty ambiguous. 2x the diameter? Surface area? in what statistic is it twice as big? Well, the easiest would be to double the surface area, Earth is about 510,000,000 square km. So the new planet would be 1,020,000,000 square km. Easy enough.
So how much diamonds per square km of surface area? That's a variable that's unknown so we'll call it X for now.
How much is a diamond worth? 1 carat of pure diamond is 200 milligrams (but that's weight not worth) unfortunately this is another variable depending on the quality of diamonds you harvest ranging from $700.00 - $4,000.00. Seeings as diamonds occur rather natural here I'm thinking we're going to get some rather big ones, so we'll go with an estimate of $3,000/carret.
Now how BIG does a diamond have to be in volume to reach 1 caret? Someone fortunately did all that math for me and estimated 2/35 cm³. that's 2/35 a cubic centimeter. So for every one of the there's 3K bucks.
So how do we calculate this? Well we have the surface area, however, that is an area not a volume to have a volume we need depth, that's where "X" comes in. how much of the depth diamond? How much is other things? So many variables.
Let's make X REALLY simple for now. Let us say that for every square KM there is only one caret of diamond. Now obviously this isn't the case, you wouldn't be able to see such a thing from SPACE. Think about that, they can see these diamonds from SPACE. But let's be all gloomy about it and say only one caret per square KM. That's really simple 3K dollars times 1,020,000,000 = 3.06 trillion dollars.
Okay, so lets not be so stingy, I mean come on the earth certainly has more the one caret per square KM so a freaking DIAMOND planet?
Alright, lets say that the crust of the planet had a layer of diamonds 1 cm thick, to put a little on the top and because I'm lazy I'm not going to account for narrowing of the sphere size difference 1 cm deep... I mean that's just being geekily asinine, let's keep it simple. Lets first convert the KM to centemeters to make it easier to work with 1,020,000,000 square km is 10,200,000,000,000 square cm, now with it being 1 cm deep it's simply that 10.2 trillion cubic cms.
And now we have our X where X is depth/square mile. 10.2cm^2 * (x)cm = Total diamonds on planet
Okay so now we can calculate total diamonds for all values x so where my money?
Well divide the total diamonds by the size of a caret to get total carets
10,200,000,000,000cm^2 * Xcm
------------------------------ = Total Carets
2/35cm^3
So with x being 1 we get 178 trillion carrots. Multiply that by our money and... 535 quadrillion dollars.
That's a little better. We could pay off the debt it took for us to get there... maybe. These pickaxes aren't going to pay for themselves.
Of course with all that diamond now in your hands... it'll probably inflate the value of diamonds by quite a bit so... yeah, there's that (utility theory after all, we have LOTs of diamonds, so they aren't rare, so aren't as valuable). Guess I just wasted your time, :) aw well.
Don't tell the private corps that though, there's DIAMONDS on there planets! DIAMONDS pitch up, move out "west" go pioneerin'!
Oh, what if the entire planet were made of the stuff? Just for other extremes. 8.9 octillion dollars. What's an octillion mean? It means fuck you your diamonds are worthless now, that's what it means. |
|
| |
|
Read 1 - Post |
| |
| The Worst Political Inquiry Ever |
|
|
| 03:41am 18/09/2012 |
| |
Romney really just breaks under pressure. No doubt I've never been under as much stress, but holy cow. I've never seen so many mistakes that just appear rookie to me coming out of Romney's mouth in this video
For 1, just by talking with the press about the video he has authenticated it. It's an ironic move by someone who has kept his tax returns a secret despite the press hounding him over it because it would make him look bad. You would think he would have consistency in that regard.
And then there's what he did say when he decided to legitimize it:
Probably the worst offense comes right away: "I don't remember the question that was asked." is not a nice thing to say because it alienates the person/people who asked the question. Can you imagine if you asked the president a question and then he goes: "Well I don't remember who are what the question was."? It shows someone who doesn't see people, someone who's more impulsive then genuinely caring, even to the people who are his allies.
The "I also have a lot of people who will vote for me no matter what... at least I hope so..." does not ensure confidence in your faith that there are people loyal to you. How are the people going to feel they should vote for you if you're not sure there are people going to vote for you? It shows a bit of lack of faith in oneself that isn't attractive to voters.
And by the way, the whole "no matter what" thing is a bit of a stretch. If Obama suddenly sent in the army to detain as many Americans as he could and detained them via the NDAA of 2012 (going back on his signing statement) I'm sure that "no matter what" would be quickly disproven. |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| Just gonna put this here... |
|
|
| 07:49pm 15/09/2012 |
| |
Rarely do I have to put my big feet down on anything, so I wanted to post this here so people do realize it can happen if things go far enough. The following was taken from a comment from Flayrah in this article where the comment section blew up when someone disliked the video posted in the article.
------------------------------
( TL;DRCollapse ) |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| 2012: The year of the Empty Chairs |
|
|
| 01:28am 01/09/2012 |
| |
"Clint Eastwooding" has taken off as a meme on the internet. It's based on the premise of presenting a person as an empty chair and having a conversation with it. However, this isn't the first time there has been a conversation of such a manner this year. In fact, representing one as an empty chair has occured at least three times this year in the news/political spectrum.
( The not so way back machineCollapse )
So to my empty chair which seats Mr. Romney, I shall not ramble. I only have one simple question: If you cannot truly unify your party through your actions not just your words, then how can you ever dream of unifying a nation? |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| Paul Ryan, the fan that no one wanted |
|
|
| 04:07am 31/08/2012 |
| |
It seems the one thing that seems pretty consistent when it comes to Paul Ryan (you know that guy running as vice president on the Republican side) is that the people he idols do not share the love back.
First was Rage against the Machine , one of Paul's favorite rock bands.
Now it's Ayn Rand, as one of his favorite philosophers. I could say, beyond a reasonable doubt, if she were truly alive today would not mix words with her denunciation of the candidate despite his like of her. I mean, here is what she had to say about Ronald Reagan not too far before her death. You think she would not completely be against a vice presidential candidate that calls rape a "method of conception" that the government must protect any offspring created from it? Nonsense. |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| Individual caused massacres: No Quick Fix to the Problem |
|
|
| 06:49pm 21/07/2012 |
| |
The cause of the Colorodo has caused many to be up in arms about arms. However, when reading through the history of the individual behind the attacks and from the possible motive what is actually more likely is that the debate should not be about guns. It should be about the expense of secondary education.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/us/pain-and-puzzles-in-wake-of-deadly-colorado-attack.html?pagewanted=all
If my read of this is correct, it sounds like the suspect went to college, and was currently working his way up to a Ph'D. For those in the know that means that you've already been in college for 4 years and now you're on your way to a really expensive endevor of becoming specialized. Luckily I was wise enough to get out before putting myself further in a financial hole. However, unfortunately for this kid he did not. From the article:
"Mr. Holmes’s background was science. Before dropping out he took a class that explored the biological origins of psychiatric and neurological disorders, and was scheduled to give a presentation on “MicroRNA Biomarkers,” according to a class schedule published online. The topic appears to demonstrate an interest in the genetic basis of mental illness.
The field of micro-RNA research is relatively new, and scientists still know little about how the short snippets of genetic material that can turn off or potentially turn up the action of a gene might play a role in illnesses like bipolar disorder or schizophrenia, said Dr. Thomas Lehner, director of the Office of Genomics Research Coordination at the National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda, Md.
But in recent years, he said, researchers have been searching for differences in micro RNA that might predispose certain people to severe mental illness."
So what it seems right now, with this kid being a loner and faced with a career that no longer existed and a multi-thousand dollar piece of paper struck back blindly at the world he felt had rejected him and his dream. Therefore, what we need to make sure happens is that when we have people who drop out or are kicked out of academia to make sure they receive financial and psychological consoling at the very least. At the most we should be addressing the expense of secondary education and making it so that there are alternatives for people who are victim of shifting job environments.
Obviously this kid didn't go about this the right way, nothing excuses what he did in any sense. However, what I always feel is that to prevent these things isn't to look at the gun, but to look at the person behind the gun and find out what situation made them pull the trigger.
Democrats say "get the guns out of the hands of psychopaths". Well of course, everyone can agree to that. There is one problem with that phrase is that it does not pertain to this case and would not have prevented it. Unless a speeding ticket makes you a psychopath.
The problem is that when an introvertive person who feels their purpose is set in stone and will focus entirely on it. When you put all that money all that planning into a career of it the person will appear normal because they have a plan. Losing that plan can lead to the radical change of behavior. Should the person not have anyone to help them through that transition or to be there during the hard times, it could cause the person to do very unseemly things they wouldn't have had if they had support.
As a person who has lived most of their life alone, I am aware of what handling big things by yourself can do to a psyche. My high school friend tried to handle being gay by himself, and he ended up killing his mother. When I lost my job in NJ I had a furry roommate to have a shoulder to cry on. He was a person who dealt with a lot of hard times in his life, so he knew that what had happened to me wasn't the end of my world though it is still one of the worst experiences I have had and I'm thankful for that. If he hadn't been there, I don't know how I would have handled the situation or what I might have been capable of doing in that state. Though I can never see myself harming others, I could have been capable of harming myself or maybe doing something that would have made the situation worse for myself.
Independence is all and good, when one is of clear mind and body. But one has to remember, sooner or later one or the other is going to give and it is at those moments that the need to rely on others is essential and the need for others to be there for others in those moment is also highlighted.
So when someone is down, being there for them can not only be beneficial to the person you are helping directly, it can impact those that might be impacted should the person who didn't receive the help necessary goes down a more dark path fueled by the lapse of judgement such a major life shift can bring.
This isn't a problem the government can solve, in fact trying to get people to rely more on a faceless entity can make the help seem impersonal. And even then they might not get the help they need if we rely too much on one entity. Because so many need help in this world, if one group or individual tries to do everything they are eventually going to deny some they don't see as a problem. Might think the person is committing fraud, when they are genuine.
Therefore, as hard as it may be to admit, it is not the fault of our system of laws, law enforcement, or guns. It is a failure of community. To be a bit nosy of their neighbors, even when they sometimes don't want you to be. To care for those around you, to ask questions and to make sure others are alright.
I think that's something everyone can do, and can help prevent such incidents in the future. Better yet, people can do this without the intervention of politicians and government who are more then happy to try and use situations like this to flex their muscles. |
|
| |
|
Read 8 - Post |
| |
| Healthcare Debate |
|
|
| 12:27pm 08/07/2012 |
| |
So while I have made an article on Flayrah dealing with the opinion of readers that politics outside the fandom shouldn't really be discussed in the site as it currently is it has brought up to me the a topic where I do have a bit of back and forth on myself. Since before this year I hadn't had to deal with any medical issues at all I find that as I am introducted to the medical world this year I did learn a bit about it, and thus some of the problems in it were highlighted to me.
The problem with Healthcare and Healthcare insurance is one of a system that is rigged towards an assumption that everyone has insurance and those that don't are punished. Wheather this insurance be private or governmentally run is of no consequence.
But really the route of the healthcare issue and the expense of healthcare comes from a variety of sources. Basically every part of our society plays a role in the expense of this. The fact that secondary education is so expensive and to be a doctor requires you to go into it for the longest period means that patients are going to have to pay for the doctor's schooling is one issue that causes it.
However, one of the primary reasons I feel is because there is this middle of the road issue. The solution might be that everyone has insurance, it could also work if health insurance in any way shape or form were illegal. The reason anything in the middle is dangerous is that those that don't have will be forced to take out loans to pay for artificially inflated prices caused by the existence of insurance. In fact to make it worse it seems that when a medical bill is payed with insurance there is a 'discount' to the insurance company which punishes the individual who took it upon themselves to save for their own medical expenses.
This is backwards from any other system I have seen. Gas stations are starting to offer discounts for people who pay with cash rather then credit. So the second hand system of payment there is a 'fee'. Where as the second hand payment is encouraged in the health industry.
Of course, because the health industry wants to encourage everyone to get on insurance, because if insurance didn't exist people would actually look at their bills. So they can charge 800 dollars for a sigmoidoscopy (which I got, and yes they do), or another couple hundred dollars to put the palyp they took out through a lab test. I would think the lab process would be alot more expensive then rolling me on a bed and shoving a camera up my ass, but as I said, doctors have their medical schooling to pay off.
The problem with having those off insurance and on with a world where the "normal" is considered having it is that those without are treated like they have two heads. So they end up having to pay more not only in the punishment of a quite factual artificially inflated cost, if they have to take out a loan they would have to pay interest on that.
In a world with zero insurance, the health industry would have a major decision to make. Cut prices so that they could have customers, or starve themselves as the people who can't afford them die off. Give me liberty or give me death indeed.
Of course the reason this second place would not be seen as good is because people would have to suffer, but they already do, this would just make the healthcare industry suffer from their hubris as well. One would also argue you'd see a growing in free clinics as the demand would increase. People tend to have this encouragement to do the right thing for less when people are suffering if they don't do otherwise.
Now before you start blaming Democrats for jury-rigging the laws so that insurance would be all but an inevitability there is one big law that has caused this to come about. Ronald Reagan made it a law that doctors had to treat patients seeking treatment no matter the circumstances. This from what I would say is the start of the issue. Most of our economy works in this way: you go to a store to buy something, you pay for it then you get the service. Now in the medical industry this is reversed. You get the treatment and then you pay. So then of course doctors are going to charge a mint since they don't have to advertise their prices like others do, they have a captive customer. You can fix their broken leg and then make up a price. So doctors said, "we're charging more" and as the doctors made more the colleges said, "hey we can make more too since the doctors we graduate will make more", and here we are where both healthcare and education are inflated to no end, and all because of the Republican's so-called hero Ronald Reagan.
People lost faith in people's generosity, in their willingness to help a stranger in need. We've gathered a mentality that charity is something that isn't acceptable for an American to receive in their time of need that's something we do for other countries. It's beneath America to allow any of its citizens to have to rely on private charity. So we replaced the individual generosity of Americans with a government mandated generosity. This is not a good thing to rely on, as politicians, like individuals will only donate to causes that they want their money going to and so others who may really need it may suffer. Individuals on the ground level can see who needs money more then a man behind a desk hundreds of miles away so when we take away money form the individual it makes them less able to be charitable themselves and less able to make decisions on where their money should go that is well more informed then their political overlords.
Now that we have a law where everyone is supposedly insured (seeings as in states where car insurance is mandated there are people that drive around without it, I'm doubtful) we'll see if this will fix the problem. We'll see if the insurance companies see that they are getting more money from their new captive audience and lower their costs for everyone.
Not going to happen.
They'll make the excuse that now they have to take people with pre-existing conditions so they might even increase the cost. If the books were revealed to the people I'm sure you'd find these pencil pushers behind a desk, whose only task is to send a check from one person to the other, are doing just fine. How much can it really cost to write a check? How much of a service really is that? It's not. All they do is take money from one's paycheck and getting a cut from the hospitals, making money on both sides of the aisle and draining from people on both sides of the transaction. They'll continue to do so, but now they'll be able to do so more efficiently.
I hope I'm wrong on this, I really do hope to see a cut in my insurance premium and everyone's but until we do remember these words and start asking yourself. Is it really a good idea to replace a society where we call for the generosity of others to a society where we rely upon the greed of others? |
|
| |
|
Read 8 - Post |
| |
| North Carolina: The Queer State |
|
|
| 05:54pm 09/05/2012 |
| |
Every state has a nickname, New York is the Empire State, Idaho is the potato state (liar it's the Gem State). Anyways what I'm saying is every state is known for something, right? Every state has a memorable attribute in which people name them. Quick, what is North Carolina (without looking it up)?
Exactly.
Tar heels? That's so out, and in fact Louisiana finds it down right offensive because if any state deserves that title in recent days they well more then did. Clearly you need to modernize, like Idaho with potatoes after all those gems magically vanished (I blame Spike, he was hungry).
Clearly North Carolina has a problem with gays, not that they have a problem with them mind you, but it's such a social problem and so many of them are living in the state now, the state literally cannot function without a law banning homosexual marriage. If they didn't no one would get straight married. Even those dudes that are straight and married knew that if that law failed to pass they would have divorced their wives and gone and found some male ass to hitch to. I'm talking metaphorically of course... until the metaphor is consummated, then it's literal. Clearly we have a problem in NC of their being so many gays per capita that they were literally bogging down the state resources and this law had to be made in order to keep stability.
Now a lot of North Carolina residents will probably tell me I'm wrong, that California is obviously the queer state because they have so many out and about. Though here's the thing, there was not enough gays in California where it was seen as a priority of the state to ban gays from marriage, obviously this means that they weren't concerned that their straights weren't anything but. You see, in California, unlike North Carolina actual straight people actually exist. It's shocking I know.
Therefore, since there are so many homosexuals in NC it can only be called the queer state. Because as one supporter of the law said "A great moral crisis was averted today", and that's true, had this law not been passed it's clear that all those so called "NC straights" would have had nothing to hold them back from living out their real desires.
In honor of the newly named state, I'll end with a bit of NC trivia: Did you know North Carolina's greatest import are closets? |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| Writer's Block: National Pi Day |
|
|
| 06:01am 14/03/2012 |
| |
Oh that's easy in fact I can put the entirety of pi in on journal post:
CircleArea / (CircleRadius * CircleRadius)
You see, fractions are more precise then decimals, that is exactly pi, and I saved memory and space for more important things. |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| A method for saving money on gas |
|
|
| 05:05pm 06/03/2012 |
| |
With gas prices going all crazy, you gotta find some way to save money on gas, and I had come up with a method in college while I was in Calculus and stuff that may help people out, so feel free to share it.
The basic principal is this: "When gas prices go up, you best keep to the pump, when gas prices go down just keep driving around."
The expanded explaination for how this works is as follows.
If gas prices are rising if you wait until your car is empty when you get around to filling your tank you will pay more then if you filled up the part of the tank that is empty at the moment in time.
When gas prices are going down, you do the opposite you wait until your tank nears empty and fill it up.
Of course this won't help on long road trips or anything like that this is more for those that use their car sparingly and there is some amount of time between pump sessions if you wait for empty.
AN EXAMPLE
RISING
Let's say gas is 2 bucks a gallon and you have a 10 gallon tank that is empty. You fill up for 20 dollars.
Your car can go for 2 weeks on a full tank so you don't have to fill it until 2 weeks later.
Now let's say gas is rising a dime a day over those two weeks, when you fill up you'll pay 34 dollars for.
Your total expenditure while doing the fill it up method is 54 dollars.
Now what if you drove everyday? That means everyday you go through 1/14 a tank of gas, translates to approximately .714 gallons of gas a day.
Now what we're going to do is fill up the car every day and so we won't get as much gas per stop, but watch what happens. We make a summation of the following where the gas price starts at 2.00 and ends up at 3.40 (.714 * gasprice).
We'll start by saying we filled up at the 2.00 just to start at the same point so 20 dollars, now lets use the new method and compare.
2.10 * .714 + 2.20 * .714 + 2.30 * .714 + ... + 3.40 * .714 = $27.48.
So you saved a total of $6.52 compared to just filling it up when the price went all the way up.
Of course you don't want to do this when the price is going down or you could end up paying more.
FALLING
To show this lets go the opposite we fill up when it is 3.40 a gallon (34 bucks) and the gas price falls to 2.00 a gallon in 2 weeks. When we fill up once every two weeks we get 54 dollars like before, but what if we do the hounding pump method? We end up paying more as opposed to less.
The summation would be the same going the opposite as forward (commutative property for the win) so if we went to the pump everyday when the price is going down we'd spend 27.18. As opposed to 20 dollars if we waited to do it all in one go resulting in a loss of 7.18.
But if all that was too math heavy just remember the phrase I used to start.
Of course this method requires a handle on the oil markets and when you expect them to go up and down so it's a bit of a gamble. I heard oil is starting to go down a little at this point so I probably wouldn't hound the pump yet.
But a simpler method is just keep an eye on the price when you pass the gas station and know what it was last time you looked, if it's going up or down since you last looked and behave accordingly.
Of course prices don't fluctuate as hard as the example so the savings will very and won't be all that much, but if you're on a real tight budget this may be a handy trick. |
|
| |
|
Read 4 - Post |
| |
| A first in politics |
|
|
| 11:51pm 21/02/2012 |
| |
I've seen many outlandish things with my following of politics. Heard many silly things. But if it was one things that both sides could agree on is that this country is founded upon one important word "Freedom". Freedom is America's holy world, so much so that George W Bush said it religiously during his presidency, so much so people made drinking games based on it. Freedom was the one word that American politicans always used in a manner of good. Never was freedom bad. Sure there were always different thoughts on what goes behind freedom. But no matter what, freedom was what was important.
Rick Santorum once again proves why I think he's one of the worst politicians of our time. He is the first politician ever Democrat or Republican to use the word freedom, and in context insinuate that freedom is bad, that it is evil and something to be stopped.
“Woodstock is the great American orgy. This is who the Democratic Party has become. They have become the party of Woodstock. The prey upon our most basic primal lusts, and that’s sex. And the whole abortion culture, it’s not about life. It’s about sexual freedom. That’s what it’s about. Homosexuality. It’s about sexual freedom.”
Yes... the Democrats are about freedom! You should hate them because they promote... freedom!...
The fuck man, the fuck...
I mean, at least Michelle Bachmann was intelligent enough to paint sex as you know... ENSLAVEMENT. As much backlash she got from that statement it still makes more sense to think of homosexuality as unAmerican because it's about enslavement rather then freedom. To say something is bad for America because it's about freedom is the most, I don't know... bat shit nuts things I've heard any politician do. |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| The Hidden Blessing of Rick Santorum |
|
|
| 06:39pm 17/02/2012 |
| |
Rick Santorum looks like he might win the Republican nomination at this point, proving if anything Republicans are less predictable then their Democrat counterparts when it comes to primaries. From what I have noted Republican primaries are based on emotions rather then weighing in rationally on odds of victory.
Were there some emotional times in the Democrat primary of '08 sure there were but in the end the worst thing that I can recall happening was Hillary Clinton claiming she was staying in the race in case Obama got assassinated on the trail.
The Republicans, boy howdy. There are two teams pretty much: Paul and Romney (the somewhat rational republicans) VS Newt and Santorum (the emotional 'gut' republicans). Romney has always had a good lead on Paul, though Paul certainly has made progress by leaps and bounds, this shows that truly his ideals are the future of the Republican party whether they want to admit that to themselves or not. If you are a youth and Republican 50% of them prefer Ron Paul in a 4 way (or more) primary.
Paul and Mitt are friendly terms, Santorum on the other hand is pretty much the Anti-Paul. They only agree on abortion, that's it. Rush Limbaugh is of course on the Santorum train, wanting so bad to beat back the Paul train that he so despises. Sanotrum is probably the last man standing on the President to go forth on an anti-gay platform, and Obama is going to do his damnedest to make sure that the republicans get that message.
While campaigning in '08 Obama was kind of mushy on the whole gay thing, he was purposefully in the center of the field because he didn't know the political temperature of the topic. Basically George Bush's overall inability made winning a sure thing for whoever the Democrat was. He just had to keep his head down.
This year though, if Rick Santorum wins the primary, the Republicans will lose a vast majority of independants. If there is anything independants despise it is a man that encourages group think, and nothing is more group think then believing the government should force people to choose how to live their lives using social programs. It's why they're not too fond of Democrats in certain programs, but it is also why they find themselves against Republicans from time to time. They both do this. Santorum is the personifcation of statism of the Republican party. He has gone onto shows and basically admitted he's FOR big government.
So all the independants are gone, so now what? Well if Obama's opponent is staunchly anti-gay Obama is going to start going all in with being pro-gay, in fact he's going to start to be a little bolder on social issues, but at the same time show he's willing to compromise.
Because every time obama does something like this is another opportunity for Santorum to go on one of his rants comparing people who have concentual sex to those that rape children or something insane, and everytime Santorum talks about gays, most Americans other then those in the mid-west (where is the only place he's won so far) feel a chill down their spine. Particularly independants.
The proof is in the pudding:
1)Santorum has spiked in the Republican side
2)Despite such a leap Santorum has gain almost no ground on Obama. In fact if we look at how many would vote for Obama, 50% only Gingrich has more votes going to Obama with 53%
3) However, Santorum has devastated any ground or chance Mitt Romney had against Obama
It may make us uncomfortable with Santorum being the nominee, it might make many Americans afraid, but it might in fact be the Red Letter day for gay rights. The time we get to face a personifcation of all the demonic gay bashing hatred of this country, and give it an extreme and loud "NO". It will be a demon which we will finally exercise from the political dialect. And after Santorum is flushed with a devastating loss in the general election he's going to WISH his legacy was the Google neologism. Because his true legacy will be the man that makes all politicians look to him as an example of what can happen when you try and attack homosexual Americans. |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
| Writer's Block: Singles Awareness Day |
|
|
| 09:22pm 14/02/2012 |
| |
I wouldn't hate it so much, I would be fine, single and just dandy if the day itself didn't seem to do everything in its power to try and make me loathe it. Seriously, if I'm not getting my car towed and having to drive through an 11 foot snow storm to get it back (no I'm not exaggerating, that was the actual accumulation it left). |
|
| |
|
Post |
| |
|
|
|
sonious