What did actually make the U.S. great?

Because, we were.  The 20th century truly was a U.S. century.

Please note, I did not say "American century".  Our seeming belief that we are the only country over the span of 2 continents worthy of consideration is endemic of one of the problems with this county.  We think we own the place.  The fact that the rest of the world lets us speaks to our influence.  In 1917, we were "The Yanks" and our soldiers "Doughboys".  At one time the British thought to simply absorb our numbers into their command.  That had all changed by the end of the 20th century.

But fighting wars wasn't what made us great.  Wars don't make anything great.  Extreme situations do, however, shine a light on what already exists.  Germany underestimated our ability to mobilize, twice.

In my opinion, what made us great was our belief in ourselves.  Many things were considered impossible until we did them.  "You can't fight on two fronts." was actually printed on U.S. propaganda during World War II.  We started out the century finishing the Panama Canal.  We turned out attention to the Mississippi River and made it navigable in a way Mark Twain would have thought impossible.  We went to the moon (no, that is not up for debate).

I think what made us great can be summarized by a story usually used to criticize us.  We wanted a pen that could write in zero gravity.  We knew pencils existed.  We made a pen that could write in zero gravity.  We did not take the easy way out.  We wanted something and we made it happen.  Yes, it was expensive.  Yes, it seems excessive.  And, yes, that didn't matter.

But now, it is a new century.  There was several attempts at electric cars by U.S. manufactures at the end of the 20th century.  General Motors EV1 was the most famous, but Ford and Chrysler also built some electric vehicles between 1996 and 2002.  All of these models were discontinued without actual production runs.  Then something happened that has become common in the 21st century, someone outside the U.S. took the risk.

Toyota launched a production hybrid in 1997.  Honda followed in 1999.  I particularly remember a commercial aired for the Honda Insight on 1/1/2000.  I also remember not seeing that commercial again.  At a hostel in Washington DC, I remember the hope that commercial inspired and the defeat I felt as I protested the inauguration of an oil man.

In 2008, work was completed on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC),  It dwarfs the U.S. Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) and is now the center for global experimentation in the area of particle physics.

We still have the drive.  We still attract the dreamers.  But, something has changed.  We as a nation won't take the risk.  We have become frightened.  We forgot that our economy was built by men like Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Elon Musk.  It was not built by anyone at Goldman-Sachs.  It was not built by the people at Apple and Atari that fired their founders.  We forgot that technology is what got us here.  We forgot that looking backwards gains you nothing.  We forgot that the word "impossible" may just be a suggestion.

It is time we remembered.  It was time we remembered that progress happens whether you like it or not.  It is time to create a solar panel that the world buys in droves, not a coal plant the world mocks.  It is time for us to accept the software industry as an industry.  It is time for us to be less concerned about milking old patents, and more concerned about filing new ones.  It is time for us to be less concerned about steel exports, and more concerned about semiconductor exports.  In short, it is time to move into the 21st century.  We can still make it a U.S. century.

Allow me to retort...

I write to my senators relatively often.  I hope that one day the amount I write will be considered minimal.  I recently wrote to my senators regarding H.R. 26 (REINS) and H.R. 998 (SCRUB).  As I believe these resolutions will pass the House, I felt writing to my senators was prudent.

I wanted to share a response I received from Senator Toomey and take this opportunity to respond.

... I am supportive of reasonable pollution controls that are designed to protect our natural resources and public health, and individual state agencies have the knowledge and experience necessary to safeguard these important assets...

Individual states you say.  I have to ask. Did Louisiana have the resources to deal with the Deepwater Horizons spill?  What percentage of the costs would Alabama contribute?  Although Alaska does benefit greatly from the oil industry, they did not benefit enough to deal with the Exxon Valdez disaster single-highhandedly.  In my own backyard, the borough of Ambler, PA contains a Superfund site.  Is the State of Pennsylvania ready to take on the cost burden associated with this site and the many others in Pennsylvania?

In all cases, the obvious answer is no.  The states do not have the resources or even the jurisdiction to oversee environmental protection.

Senator Toomey goes further to state:

..I am concerned about the excessive regulations coming out of the federal bureaucracy in recent years that needlessly impede job creation and harm Pennsylvania farmers..

Are we really going to go down this path yet again?  The last time industry was actually negatively effected by the EPA was in 1973 when the use of spray-applied asbestos was banned.  Even removing lead from our gasoline did not negatively effect an industry as one can see from looking at the profit margins of Exxon

I am not certain what regulation(s) Senator Toomey is referring to that "harm Pennsylvania farmers".  The regulations that have passed in the last 8 years have been focused on the energy industry.  As the United States is still the 2nd largest consumer of coal, I support all of these regulations as I have worked with coal combustors and know the effects of Black Lung.

The specter of "job loss" comes up again with:

.. Under the Obama Administration, the EPA and other federal regulators were especially aggressive in proposing new rules that raised energy prices, imposed onerous compliance costs, undermined economic growth, and put Pennsylvanians out of work...

Let us see.  According the U.S Energy Infromation Administration, the cost to "Ultimate Consumer" was 9.74 cents/KwH in 2008.  By 2016, that had risen to an amazing 9.96 cents/KwH.  In 2011, it reached a staggering 9.99 cents/KwH.  No adjustments for inflation or any tweaks.

Let's talk about unemployment.  Without any spinning, adjustment, etc. according the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in January of 2009, the Unemployment Rate was 7.8.  In January of 2017, the Unemployment Rate was 4.8.  Same organization, same calculation method.

I would be glad to discuss actual data with Senator Toomey at any time.  I do recommend that he consult other sources.  He seems to be getting his information from rhetoric and misnomer, both of which have horrible track records.

And just so everyone can see that I did not take anything out of context, here is the email in its entirety:

March 24, 2017



Dear Mr. Musick,

Thank you for contacting me about the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I appreciate hearing from you.

Like most Pennsylvanians, I believe it is essential to protect our state's natural beauty and the quality of our environment. I am supportive of reasonable pollution controls that are designed to protect our natural resources and public health, and individual state agencies have the knowledge and experience necessary to safeguard these important assets. It is for these reasons that I have supported commonsense efforts in Congress to protect the environment and conserve lands for the enjoyment of future generations.

While I support sensible environmental protections, I am concerned about the excessive regulations coming out of the federal bureaucracy in recent years that needlessly impede job creation and harm Pennsylvania farmers. Under the Obama Administration, the EPA and other federal regulators were especially aggressive in proposing new rules that raised energy prices, imposed onerous compliance costs, undermined economic growth, and put Pennsylvanians out of work. I am hopeful that the Trump Administration will take a new direction and pursue a more balanced approach that is mindful of both our economy as well as our environment.

On March 16, 2017, President Trump released his fiscal year 2018 budget blueprint, which proposed reducing the EPA's budget by 30 percent compared to the current fiscal year. I understand your concerns about how federal budget cuts could impact environmental conservation in Pennsylvania, and it is important to know that the President's budget is only a proposal and has not been enacted into law. Please know that my staff and I are reviewing all areas of the President's budget blueprint, and I appreciate hearing your input.

Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.

Sincerely,

Pat Toomey
U.S. Senator, Pennsylvania

I'm going to be mean now...

.. because I'm letting emotion get the better of me.  That is not an apology.  We can not be cold and calculating.  We must have passion

And so, let me state several opinions very concisely:

• If you feel that providing for the lesser fortunate is a waste of money, you are cruel.
  
• If you feel that the current political and economic systems in the United States are fair, you are misguided.
  
• If you would hold others back so that you can advance, you are a loser.
  
• If you feel that health is a commodity, you are a fool.
  
• If you feel that any group of people is "... taking your...", you are a failure and are blaming your failure on others.  If you blame others for your failure, you will continue to be a failure.
  
• If you stand by, and watch, and do nothing, you are complicit.

I have been disgusted for so long that I can no longer be peaceable.  The counter-points no longer warrant consideration.  There is no common ground.  I no longer believe that ignorance is to blame.  I will no longer attempt to educate those who disagree.

The dismantling of social programs is barbaric and misanthropic, not misguided.  Reallocating funds from the arts to an already over-inflated military can only be the act of the hate-filled, not the insecure or those who have been lied to.  The lies are not the problem.  Those who have chosen to willfully deny facts to believe the lies are the problem.

I will now return to pursuing the avenues available to me to resist.