I know there are plenty of descriptions of the U.S. debt going around, but I'll add to the discussion:
The C-130 Hercules military transport plane has a maximum payload, in the C-130H iteration, of 45,000 lb. I will assume that interior space is not an issue, mostly because that is a lot of calculating to do.
A $100 bill weighs 1 gram (1/454 lb.).
454 bills / lb. x $100 / bill = $45,400 / lb.
$45,400 /lb. x 45,000 lb. / payload = $2,043,000,000 / payload
The Boehner plan would have $2.5 trillion available by early next year. Again for time reasons, I will assume that that means by 4/1/2012, or 250 days away.
Thus, starting today,
$2.5x10^12 / $2x10^9 / load = 1,250 loads
1,250 loads / 250 days = 5 loads / day
or one C-130 stuffed to the gills with $100 bills every 4 hours and 48 minutes.
With a cruising speed of 292 knots or 336 mph, that means if the C-130s had to fly the cash from San Antonio to New York, a great circle distance of about 1,600 miles, there would always be a plane in the air to keep up this schedule. Just to cover those costs of the United States government greater than revenue, without paying down a cent toward debt reduction.
Monday, July 25, 2011
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Telling the Truth
Lawyers enjoy a little mystery, you know. Why, if everybody came forward and told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth straight out, we should all retire to the workhouse.
Sir Impey Biggs
Clouds of Witness
Dorothy L. Sayers
Sir Impey Biggs
Clouds of Witness
Dorothy L. Sayers
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Hurray for theoretical physics
(Reprint of picture believed to be public domain. Please submit any copyright issue to the gmail (.com) address which begins with gbacopyright)
Monday, May 30, 2011
Problem Projects
"At my age, if you have a problem with one of your projects, you probably just don't have enough clamps."
~BEK - while working on a troublesome picture frame -
Age 80
~BEK - while working on a troublesome picture frame -
Age 80
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Obligatory Levitical Legalism
Deuteronomy 18:20-22 (ESV)
20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, ... that same prophet shall die. 21 And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?'-- 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.
20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, ... that same prophet shall die. 21 And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?'-- 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Gaming the system
The interesting case law for today could also be known as the Tale of the Collections Attorney Who Was Too Clever By Half:
J. I. Case Co. v. United Virginia Bank, 232 Va. 210 (1986) - Plaintiff filed an action in detinue (requesting return of specific personal property rather than just its value) seeking the recovery of unsold heavy equipment in the possession of its debtor's bank, who had seized the equipment from the debtor's inventory under a UCC lien. It sought and obtained a prejudgment attachment of the property, and posted a bond which was "void unless the right of possession ultimately was judged against" the Plaintiff. The sheriff went out, collected the equipment, and handed it over to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff then removed the equipment from Virginia, and ultimately distributed the equipment across the country for retail sale. Thinking it had accomplished everything it had set out to do by getting the equipment away from the bank, an (allegedly) secured creditor with an inferior claim to the equipment, the Plaintiff filed a nonsuit of right under Virginia Code § 8.01-380, dismissing the action before the bank and the debtor had an opportunity to present their full defense to the Plaintiff's claim or obtain the judgment needed to collect on the bond.
HELD: without completing a final judgment on the detinue action, the plaintiff had no adjudicated right to the property, and the defendants had a right to its return without any further proceedings. Because the equipment had been disposed of by the Plaintiff, judgment was entered for the value of the equipment against the Plaintiff.
Unsaid in the opinion is that by trying to pull a fast one like this, it sounds like the Plaintiff disposed of the only property in which it had a security interest, which demoted it to an unsecured creditor fighting for whatever scraps might be left over after the bank and other secured creditors took out their portions. Also unresolved (but left for the trial court) was whether the bond was satisfied by such a judgment.
J. I. Case Co. v. United Virginia Bank, 232 Va. 210 (1986) - Plaintiff filed an action in detinue (requesting return of specific personal property rather than just its value) seeking the recovery of unsold heavy equipment in the possession of its debtor's bank, who had seized the equipment from the debtor's inventory under a UCC lien. It sought and obtained a prejudgment attachment of the property, and posted a bond which was "void unless the right of possession ultimately was judged against" the Plaintiff. The sheriff went out, collected the equipment, and handed it over to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff then removed the equipment from Virginia, and ultimately distributed the equipment across the country for retail sale. Thinking it had accomplished everything it had set out to do by getting the equipment away from the bank, an (allegedly) secured creditor with an inferior claim to the equipment, the Plaintiff filed a nonsuit of right under Virginia Code § 8.01-380, dismissing the action before the bank and the debtor had an opportunity to present their full defense to the Plaintiff's claim or obtain the judgment needed to collect on the bond.
HELD: without completing a final judgment on the detinue action, the plaintiff had no adjudicated right to the property, and the defendants had a right to its return without any further proceedings. Because the equipment had been disposed of by the Plaintiff, judgment was entered for the value of the equipment against the Plaintiff.
Unsaid in the opinion is that by trying to pull a fast one like this, it sounds like the Plaintiff disposed of the only property in which it had a security interest, which demoted it to an unsecured creditor fighting for whatever scraps might be left over after the bank and other secured creditors took out their portions. Also unresolved (but left for the trial court) was whether the bond was satisfied by such a judgment.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Good Wife Points
I have so many "Good Wife Points" built up just now. I am going to have to figure out something good to spend them on soon.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Legal Food Frenzy
A recent study by Feeding America found that over 1,000,000 Virginians are considered “food insecure.” This represents nearly a forty percent increase since 2006. A large number of these individuals are children, senior citizens, disabled adults, and the new face of hunger—individuals who have lost their jobs and are having problems making ends meet. In fact, Virginia’s food banks are currently experiencing record demand for services.
THE RESPONSE
In response to this urgent need, the Office of the Attorney General, The Virginia Bar Association Young Lawyers Division, and the Federation of Virginia Food Banks joined efforts in 2007 to create the Statewide Legal Food Frenzy—a food and fund drive competition among all Virginia law firms and organizations. In this friendly competition, the law firm or organization that raises the most food (based on a per person average—attorneys and staff) will be awarded the prestigious and highly coveted “Attorney General’s Cup.” In addition, Attorney General C------- will be awarding winners of the sole practitioner, small, medium, and large size firm categories. The top law school will be awarded the prized “Mini Attorney General’s Cup” and a special award will be given to the top government/public interest office.
Over the past four years, law firms, legal organizations, and law schools who participated in the Statewide Legal Food Frenzy have raised the equivalent of more than 5,400,000 pounds of food.
This year, we hope is to raise the equivalent of at least 1,600,000 pounds of food, so that we can meet our five year goal of raising the equivalent of 7,000,000 pounds of food for Virginians in need. To reach our goal, we need each and every law firm, legal department, law office, law school, and court in Virginia to participate.
The Brain and his firm, being lovers of food, participated with gusto. They amassed about 2250 pounds of supplies to donate to the cause. They are hoping to win the competition so that they can go to Richmond and meet the AG... oh wait... They are hoping to win the competition because it would be a tangible way to benefit the community, raise awareness of an under addressed situation, and demonstrate the importance of generosity. And they like to win.
The picture is all the water that was loaded into Warwick today. Hurray for strong trucks!
Friday, April 15, 2011
Very Judicious
Defense Counsel: I need at least 25 pages to summarize all my legal arguments, your honor.
Judge: You can write 25 pages, counselor, so long as you tell me which 15 pages I should read.
Defense Counsel: Should I put that in the Order?
Judge: No.
(via On the Record in Cook County.)
Page limits are usually a good thing for a profession headed by a group which can publish hundred page opinions on whether a person had a proper opportunity to be heard. The 15 pages in Illinois sounds a little generous in fact - Virginia usually limits briefs to 5 pages. Makes you think about what is important.
Friday, March 04, 2011
Legal term of the Day: Writ of venditioni exponas
Though this term is a bit of a mouthful, and probably makes some of you think of something that Hermione Granger would have found in an obscure volume, this is a helpful common law tool in collections work.
In essence, the writ commands a sheriff who has levied on property (to satisfy an unpaid judgment) to attempt a second time to sell the property even though there were no bidders at the first sale without having to repeat the levy process.
In Virginia, the writ has been expanded by statute (Va. Code § 8.01-211) to allow the Commonwealth, in cases where persons owe the government money, to use the writ to transport the property (magically, we might say, to keep up the J. K. Rowling theme) from the county where the levy took place to an adjoining county where, if all goes well, the other sheriff will be able to find a bidder in the new pool of buyers.
In essence, the writ commands a sheriff who has levied on property (to satisfy an unpaid judgment) to attempt a second time to sell the property even though there were no bidders at the first sale without having to repeat the levy process.
In Virginia, the writ has been expanded by statute (Va. Code § 8.01-211) to allow the Commonwealth, in cases where persons owe the government money, to use the writ to transport the property (magically, we might say, to keep up the J. K. Rowling theme) from the county where the levy took place to an adjoining county where, if all goes well, the other sheriff will be able to find a bidder in the new pool of buyers.
Wednesday, March 02, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Newest climate research - guess what they concluded?
Nature has reportedly published a pair of new studies of rainfall which came to a number of unsurprising conclusions via a number of unsurprising steps.
1) Using a perception of changed conditions based at least in significant part on observations subject to changing measurement protocols (e.g., river flow data since 1766),
2) they built a computer model which, based on the assumptions they engineered into it, predicted a difference in likely outcome based on whether we pump tons of carbon into the air, and then
3) blame specific modern events on these gas emissions.
3 for 3 from the grave, Mr. Crichton.
*Yawn*, Nature.
1) Using a perception of changed conditions based at least in significant part on observations subject to changing measurement protocols (e.g., river flow data since 1766),
2) they built a computer model which, based on the assumptions they engineered into it, predicted a difference in likely outcome based on whether we pump tons of carbon into the air, and then
3) blame specific modern events on these gas emissions.
3 for 3 from the grave, Mr. Crichton.
*Yawn*, Nature.
Saturday, February 05, 2011
PM David Cameron - Finally someone takes a stand
BBC News
5 February 2011
State multiculturalism has failed, says David Cameron
David Cameron said Britain had encouraged different cultures to live separate lives
David Cameron has criticised "state multiculturalism" in his first speech as prime minister on radicalisation and the causes of terrorism.
At a security conference in Munich, he argued the UK needed a stronger national identity to prevent people turning to all kinds of extremism.
He also signalled a tougher stance on groups promoting Islamist extremism.
The speech angered some Muslim groups, while others queried its timing amid an English Defence League rally in the UK.
As Mr Cameron outlined his vision, he suggested there would be greater scrutiny of some Muslim groups which get public money but do little to tackle extremism.
Ministers should refuse to share platforms or engage with such groups, which should be denied access to public funds and barred from spreading their message in universities and prisons, he argued.
"Frankly, we need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and much more active, muscular liberalism," the prime minister said.
Human rights
"Let's properly judge these organisations: Do they believe in universal human rights - including for women and people of other faiths? Do they believe in equality of all before the law? Do they believe in democracy and the right of people to elect their own government? Do they encourage integration or separatism?
"These are the sorts of questions we need to ask. Fail these tests and the presumption should be not to engage with organisations," he added.
The Labour MP for Luton South, Gavin Shuker, asked if it was wise for Mr Cameron to make the speech on the same day the English Defence League staged a major protest in his constituency.
There was further criticism from Labour's Sadiq Khan whose comments made in a Daily Mirror article sparked a row.
The shadow justice secretary was reported as saying Mr Cameron was "writing propaganda material for the EDL".
Conservative Party chairman Baroness Warsi hit back, saying that "to smear the prime minister as a right wing extremist is outrageous and irresponsible". She called on Labour leader Ed Miliband to disown the remarks.
Meanwhile, the Muslim Council of Britain's assistant secretary general, Dr Faisal Hanjra, described Mr Cameron's speech as "disappointing".
He told Radio 4's Today programme: "We were hoping that with a new government, with a new coalition that there'd be a change in emphasis in terms of counter-terrorism and dealing with the problem at hand.
"In terms of the approach to tackling terrorism though it doesn't seem to be particularly new.
"Again it just seems the Muslim community is very much in the spotlight, being treated as part of the problem as opposed to part of the solution."
In the speech, Mr Cameron drew a clear distinction between Islam the religion and what he described as "Islamist extremism" - a political ideology he said attracted people who feel "rootless" within their own countries.
"We need to be clear: Islamist extremism and Islam are not the same thing," he said.
The government is currently reviewing its policy to prevent violent extremism, known as Prevent, which is a key part of its wider counter-terrorism strategy.
A genuinely liberal country "believes in certain values and actively promotes them", Mr Cameron said.
"Freedom of speech. Freedom of worship. Democracy. The rule of law. Equal rights, regardless of race, sex or sexuality.
"It says to its citizens: This is what defines us as a society. To belong here is to believe these things."
He said under the "doctrine of state multiculturalism", different cultures have been encouraged to live separate lives.
'I am a Londoner too'
"We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values."
Building a stronger sense of national and local identity holds "the key to achieving true cohesion" by allowing people to say "I am a Muslim, I am a Hindu, I am a Christian, but I am a Londoner... too", he said.
Security minister Baroness Neville-Jones said when Mr Cameron expressed his opposition to extremism, he meant all forms, not just Islamist extremism.
"There's a widespread feeling in the country that we're less united behind values than we need to be," she told Today.
"There are things the government can do to give a lead and encourage participation in society, including all minorities."
But the Islamic Society of Britain's Ajmal Masroor said the prime minister did not appreciate the nature of the problem.
"I think he's confusing a couple of issues: national identity and multiculturalism along with extremism are not connected. Extremism comes about as a result of several other factors," he told BBC Radio 5 live.
Former home secretary David Blunkett said while it was right the government promoted national identity, it had undermined its own policy by threatening to withdraw citizenship lessons from schools.
He accused Education Secretary Michael Gove of threatening to remove the subject from the national curriculum of secondary schools in England at a time "we've never needed it more".
"It's time the right hand knew what the far-right hand is doing," he said.
"In fact, it's time that the government were able to articulate one policy without immediately undermining it with another."
BBC © MMXI
5 February 2011
State multiculturalism has failed, says David Cameron
David Cameron said Britain had encouraged different cultures to live separate lives
David Cameron has criticised "state multiculturalism" in his first speech as prime minister on radicalisation and the causes of terrorism.
At a security conference in Munich, he argued the UK needed a stronger national identity to prevent people turning to all kinds of extremism.
He also signalled a tougher stance on groups promoting Islamist extremism.
The speech angered some Muslim groups, while others queried its timing amid an English Defence League rally in the UK.
As Mr Cameron outlined his vision, he suggested there would be greater scrutiny of some Muslim groups which get public money but do little to tackle extremism.
Ministers should refuse to share platforms or engage with such groups, which should be denied access to public funds and barred from spreading their message in universities and prisons, he argued.
"Frankly, we need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and much more active, muscular liberalism," the prime minister said.
Human rights
"Let's properly judge these organisations: Do they believe in universal human rights - including for women and people of other faiths? Do they believe in equality of all before the law? Do they believe in democracy and the right of people to elect their own government? Do they encourage integration or separatism?
"These are the sorts of questions we need to ask. Fail these tests and the presumption should be not to engage with organisations," he added.
The Labour MP for Luton South, Gavin Shuker, asked if it was wise for Mr Cameron to make the speech on the same day the English Defence League staged a major protest in his constituency.
There was further criticism from Labour's Sadiq Khan whose comments made in a Daily Mirror article sparked a row.
The shadow justice secretary was reported as saying Mr Cameron was "writing propaganda material for the EDL".
Conservative Party chairman Baroness Warsi hit back, saying that "to smear the prime minister as a right wing extremist is outrageous and irresponsible". She called on Labour leader Ed Miliband to disown the remarks.
Meanwhile, the Muslim Council of Britain's assistant secretary general, Dr Faisal Hanjra, described Mr Cameron's speech as "disappointing".
He told Radio 4's Today programme: "We were hoping that with a new government, with a new coalition that there'd be a change in emphasis in terms of counter-terrorism and dealing with the problem at hand.
"In terms of the approach to tackling terrorism though it doesn't seem to be particularly new.
"Again it just seems the Muslim community is very much in the spotlight, being treated as part of the problem as opposed to part of the solution."
In the speech, Mr Cameron drew a clear distinction between Islam the religion and what he described as "Islamist extremism" - a political ideology he said attracted people who feel "rootless" within their own countries.
"We need to be clear: Islamist extremism and Islam are not the same thing," he said.
The government is currently reviewing its policy to prevent violent extremism, known as Prevent, which is a key part of its wider counter-terrorism strategy.
A genuinely liberal country "believes in certain values and actively promotes them", Mr Cameron said.
"Freedom of speech. Freedom of worship. Democracy. The rule of law. Equal rights, regardless of race, sex or sexuality.
"It says to its citizens: This is what defines us as a society. To belong here is to believe these things."
He said under the "doctrine of state multiculturalism", different cultures have been encouraged to live separate lives.
'I am a Londoner too'
"We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values."
Building a stronger sense of national and local identity holds "the key to achieving true cohesion" by allowing people to say "I am a Muslim, I am a Hindu, I am a Christian, but I am a Londoner... too", he said.
Security minister Baroness Neville-Jones said when Mr Cameron expressed his opposition to extremism, he meant all forms, not just Islamist extremism.
"There's a widespread feeling in the country that we're less united behind values than we need to be," she told Today.
"There are things the government can do to give a lead and encourage participation in society, including all minorities."
But the Islamic Society of Britain's Ajmal Masroor said the prime minister did not appreciate the nature of the problem.
"I think he's confusing a couple of issues: national identity and multiculturalism along with extremism are not connected. Extremism comes about as a result of several other factors," he told BBC Radio 5 live.
Former home secretary David Blunkett said while it was right the government promoted national identity, it had undermined its own policy by threatening to withdraw citizenship lessons from schools.
He accused Education Secretary Michael Gove of threatening to remove the subject from the national curriculum of secondary schools in England at a time "we've never needed it more".
"It's time the right hand knew what the far-right hand is doing," he said.
"In fact, it's time that the government were able to articulate one policy without immediately undermining it with another."
BBC © MMXI
Saturday, January 01, 2011
Thursday, December 02, 2010
Everything we know is wrong?
[Article here - "Second Genesis on Earth?"]
Scientists locate arsenic-tolerating bacteria, demonstrate that the bacteria are using the arsenic in place of phosphorus. So what? This means that the bacteria have cracked the traditionally held carbo-oxy-hydro-nitro-sulph-phos cell structure that was assumed to be the essential building blocks of life. We may be a long way from Star Trek's silicon-based life (in lieu of carbon), but it appears substitution can happen even here on earth.
Scientists locate arsenic-tolerating bacteria, demonstrate that the bacteria are using the arsenic in place of phosphorus. So what? This means that the bacteria have cracked the traditionally held carbo-oxy-hydro-nitro-sulph-phos cell structure that was assumed to be the essential building blocks of life. We may be a long way from Star Trek's silicon-based life (in lieu of carbon), but it appears substitution can happen even here on earth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)