No Foreign Nationals for R&D At the Department Of Defense

Andrea Widener has a short article in the November 5 issue of Chemical and Engineering News. It concerns a report from the National Academies on the manpower of Research and Development section of the Department of Defense (DOD).

          The National Academies is a combination of four other societies, which are all honorary membership organizations. Total membership is about 6,000 scientists, engineers, and health professionals.

          The National Academies' report generally criticizes the Department of Defense for poor management of its employees but concentrates on the shortage of qualified scientists and engineers in the department. To alleviate that situation, it suggests that Congress reform the H-18 Visa system to allow more highly trained non-American graduates of US universities to work at DOD.

          This is a ridiculous recommendation, which this scientist strongly opposes. No matter what our shortage of qualified scientists and engineers may be in the DOD, we should never allow entrance to non-Americans. DOD research and development work is highly confidential. We have enough foreigners trying to kill Americans, without giving them access to improved technology. How far do you think we would have gotten in development of the atomic bomb if we had invited German and Japanese scientists to participate? 

EU R&D Results Available to US?

With the previous development of the European Union, it assumed responsibility for European research and development in much the same manner that the various US government agencies have established grant programs of taxpayer funds to universities.

My personal opinion is that this is a socialistic program which is not justifiable for either the US or the European Union. However I have no objection to the European Union acceding to the 100,000 people request and continuing their unified Research and Development efforts.

I say this because, with the general socialistic attitude of the Europeans, the results of such Research and Development will be generally publicly available, presumably to the US as well as to the member European countries

If this is true, the US may be able to recoup through any positive the EU R&D results some of the previous expenditures we have made to Europe and also justify our own reduction of R&D research grants.

While this seems like a "leech" attitude, it is not much different than the US supplying for the world the various R&D development in pharmaceuticals, with the result that other countries then produce those same substances and sell them at low cost without having the need to amortize R&D costs.

With my proposal, it is at least justifiable in consideration of the previous blood, sweat, and tears we have spent on the Europeans.

Dow and DuPont Shutdowns and Layoffs

    In the October 25 issue of Chemical and Engineering News, Marc Reisch has an article entitled, "Dow And DuPont Unveiled Job, Plant Cuts". Reasons for the reductions are indicated as operating in a slow growth and volatile world.
    Dow will eliminate 2400 jobs and shutdown 20 facilities.
    DuPont will eliminate 1500 jobs, shutdown a polyethylene facility and sell off its automobile coatings business.
    Why is this? The simple answer is that business is bad.
    Dow, DuPont, and chemical companies in general make basic materials which are then formulated by other companies into consumer products. Business is bad for the formulating companies, and they reduce their purchases of basic materials from the chemical companies.
    Why is business bad for the formulating companies? With a general reduction in household income, consumers are reducing purchases of formulated or consumer products.
    How do we arrive at a general reduction in household income? A large amount of unemployment has led to a significant reduction in the average household income pie.
    Are there any other factors which discourage the consumer from buying? Other than the fact that he has less money, the average consumer also has higher expenses. Gasoline prices are significantly higher. The price of bread is up about 80% in the last 15 years. Healthcare costs are up. Costs for restaurant meals and entertainment are up. Local taxes continue to increase. In general, cost-of-living continues to climb.
    Why is cost-of-living up when household income is down? Cost-of-living is primarily related to the value of the dollar, which continues to shrink. The shrinkage is caused by inflation, which is a result of the overprinting of money by the Federal Reserve.
    Why does the Federal reserve overprint money? Because government needs money to continue its operations. Government cannot obtain sufficient funds from public taxation or from borrowing.
    Why doesn't government spend less money? There are several reasons. Government officials feel a sense of power when they are in control of spending public funds. Government officials also feel a need to be reelected in order to maintain their sense of power and personal high incomes. Reelection require satisfying the local electorate, which can be accomplished by bringing back from the federal coffers more money for local spending then has been obtained from taxes. In other words, at bigger piece of the pie.
    Until most of these problems can be resolved, Dow, DuPont and other chemical companies will continue to see their businesses decline, which will require further employee layoffs and a shutdown of manufacturing facilities.Dow and DuPont shutdowns and layoffs

    General Petraeus had an extramarital affair. So what?
    President Clinton had at least two extramarital affairs while in office (Lewinsky and Jones). Some of the sexual acts were performed in the Oval Office.
    President Clinton never resigned.
    President Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. He was not removed from office. There was no charge involving an extramarital affair or sexual misconduct.
    While it does not speak well of Gen. Petraeus' character to have been involved in an extramarital affair, it does not appear to have affected his job performance or have had any effect on blackmail related to his job. However, his resignation does support his character flaw. It is clear that he has a character flaw in morality, but he has two instances of poor judgment. The first was being involved in an extramarital affair and the second was to have resigned because of it.

Open email to Bill O'Reilly at FOXNews:

Bill,
    You asked why a 32--year-old single woman will vote Democrat, while a married woman of the same age will vote Republican.
    Part of a feminine emotion is a desire to be taken care of.
    A married woman emotionally depends upon her husband for her emotional stability. This leaves her free for a more objective look at her family and society in general. The Republican platform more closely matches her desires.
    A single woman does not have a male figure on which to depend. Therefore, she is attracted to a government bureaucracy, which can give her the stability she needs. Couple that with the father image of the President, and she is emotionally a strong Democrat.

Let's See the Data Justifying a Stricter Ozone Standard

In the Government Concentrates Section of the October 29 issue of Chemical and Engineering News, GH reviews recent activity by the Environmental Protective Protection Agency with respect to concentrations of ozone in the ground-level atmosphere.




The current ozone standard is 75 parts per billion, which was established in 2008. There is no information on how that limit was established.



EPA now wants to reduce that level to 60 is 70 ppb. Ozone is indicated as an irritating air pollutant and EPA says it has "rationale" for reducing the standard. No mention is made on what that rationale consists of.



At least the EPA has started to consider money when making its pronouncements. In this case, it estimates that US businesses could lose $90 billion per year with the new standard, but that this cost would be offset by benefits to public health. There is no explanation of how these business costs were calculated and other benefits to public health.



Until we see a better analysis of cost-benefit, I am opposed to any change in the ozone standard. In fact, I also suggest that the present ozone standard should be reviewed to see whether it has really made a significant positive cost-benefit.

A Non-Government Program for Small Business Start-Ups

More good news!

Marc Reisch has a two-page article in the October 22 issue of Chemical and Engineering News, entitled "Funding Startups". A subtitle says, "Investor network gears up to offer seed capital, advice to nascent chemical businesses".

The article is actually broader in concept than the subtitle implies. The accent is entrepreneurship and specifically the startup of small businesses.

Today's climate has three advantages for such startups. First, universities are eager to commercialize any technology that they have developed through research. Second, retired scientists with the investing bug are ready to risk a little more and help startup businesses become more than concepts. Lastly, in today's slow economy many late career scientists are looking for jobs and are eager for opportunity.

The total approach involves the Angel Resource Institute, a nonprofit information clearinghouse for early-stage investing. The clearinghouse lists 329 Angel investor groups in North America. Each investment of an Angel Group involves approximately $100 thousand in seed money to help launch a new business. Subsequently, when the new business has gathered momentum, venture capitalists come in and are able to supply millions of dollars raised from wealthy individuals and institutions.

Of the total number of Angel deals, about 32% involves new Internet businesses and about 20% health care, although the essence of the ACS article is on a new program to foster chemical startups.

Without going into unnecessary detail, the main point of this writing is that there is a significant private program for the development of new businesses and entrepreneurship in general, which does not involve government.