Technology For Africa

For anyone who is interested in helping others and spreading education, this project may interest you.

I am a part of a project called Technology For Africa based out of the College of Charleston. The Students In Free Enterprise (SIFE) team has been working on this student outreach project for a year and half and this Thursday, February 26, 2009, we will leave for Cameroon with 24 computers in hand.

Our team has raised almost $60,000 to buy 24 computers and set them up in three different schools in the African nation of Cameroon. Eight students will take the computers to Cameroon over their spring break to set them up and train the students to use them for education, communication and to spread entrepreneurship.

Please visit our blog: www.techforafrica.blogspot.com for pictures and video of the trip and news on the trips progress. Also visit our website: www.technologyforafrica.com for more information. We are also still accepting donations as we still have thousands of dollars to raise with less than 1 week until we leave.

Thank you for your support.

President Elect

It's been awhile since my last post, but now that the election is over, I must put in my two cents.

I have to say that I am happy that Obama is our new president elect and I did support and vote for him. My absentee ballet was a little late because things in New York were a little messed up and it took awhile to get down to me at school in Charleston, SC, but none the less I did get it and I did vote.



His speech's now are sounding a little more like a president instead of someone trying to gain support and I know this has some people worried. On Anderson Cooper 360 they were talking about this and most people are ok with his new tone and so am I. He is not as energetic as before and it looks like the weight of his new job is starting to fall on his shoulders. I will be keeping an eye on his speech's, statements and press conferences to see what changes over the new few months before he takes office.

Today Was A Good Day. . .

Ok, so aside from the fact that something very good happened at work today that I can't talk about, the market did pretty well for itself too. It's about time too. When things looked bad last week I started thinking, "The Dow will probably dip below 11,000, stay there for a couple of days, and then slowly start to go back up." Well I don't know if you noticed, but that's EXACTLY what happened. Ok, so I might not be a great financial expert, but lets look at the facts and see why this is happening and where things should be going.

The price of oil is down to about $134 per barrel. High, but significantly off it's most expensive point. A new gas station opened on my way to work about a two weeks ago they started selling gas at $4.10 for regular only to LOWER, that’s right LOWER it to $3.98. I know I said before that prices wouldn't go down until the supply exceeded the demand and that, that day was a long way off. Now I'm starting think I may have been a little off. I think the demand in the past 6 or 7 months was thought to be higher than it really was. Steal prices have increased in the last 6-7 months also 100% and that actually helps the US because it brings so much money to US business from foreign firms, but now those prices have started to level off. So I believe that yes, there was huge jump in global demand of oil and commodities towards the end of 2007, but the problem came when people expected that trend to continue much longer than it really did. Now the demand isn't decreasing, but tapering off and the current supplies suddenly seem to be enough to meet the demand. (I talk a lot about supply and demand don't I?) But as oil futures look to be coming down, they have left a trail of destruction behind it. But it may not be all that bad.

The fed is getting ready to raise rates, which although may put a strain on some thing's in the short run, it makes the dollar stronger. And there's been talk about Fannie May and the mortgage crisis and a possible bail out by the government. Well the truth is, Fannie May has more money then is required to have by US law and although they have been losing money, who hasn't? When the market is down and the dollar is weak, people lose money. Big business loses a lot of money. But they're not going bankrupt and banks are not going to fail at horrendous rates as some people are talking about.

I think today, after the 276+ point gain on the Dow, people went "Oh hey, it's not that bad." So if I had money, I would buy buy buy! But I don't have money because the markets have sucked for the past few months! But you know what, some people still do have money and if they have a clue about what's going on, they'll start to buy.

I know this seems like a very crude and simple opinion on a very large and complex issue, but for arguments sake, it makes the point. Google what I said and you'll find out I'm not making anything up, but it's past 5:00 and I want to go home.

North Korea, Iran & Israel?

For those who haven’t heard the news, North Korea just destroyed the cooling tower of their nuclear reactor. This was the most symbolic feature of their nuclear program. Earlier in the week they also issued a statement saying they would stop the production of any nuclear arms. In response, the U.S. said they would end “hostile policy” towards the state, so the denuclearization process can continue smoothly. But why now? Just under two years ago North Korea exploded a nuclear bomb to show the world they had this power. They have been doing tests up until just a few months ago. And the U.S. has been trying to get them to end their program for years. So why now? I feel like Israel might be the answer.

Last week Israeli forces carried out a practice bombing running with over 100 fighter jets and refueling crafts in the Mediterranean. The distance of this practice bombing run was the same distance from Israel to Iran. It is no secret that Iran and North Korea had been supporting each other and were part of the Axis of Evil. (They probably had a secret Facebook group and messaged each other late at night and posted pictures of their bombs.) And Iran has been under the same scrutiny to get ride of their nuclear program by the U.S. despite their claims that they are using the technology for peaceful purpose, mainly as a source of energy. Needless to say, Iran got the message from Israel and replied by basically saying, ‘If you want a fight, we’ll fight.’ Great. But am I worried about Israel? No. I am Jewish and support Israel 110%, but they probably don’t need it. They have never lost a war and have taken out nuclear facilities in the past. In 1981 they took out Iraq’s nuclear plants and just last year bombed a suspected nuclear site in Syria. Their message “You build a nuclear plant and say you hate our state, we’ll blow it the fuck up!” Although they would say it in a nicer way. And maybe through some Yiddish in. But anyway!

So if I’m North Korea and I’ve been trying to build these bombs for decades now and I have a few small ones in stock, (about 10 that the U.S. knows of) and the most powerful army in the world hates me and has a history of going into countries they don’t like and screwing everything up (USA) and my best friend (Iran) is in danger of being attacked by country that has never lost a war (Israel), maybe I’m thinking it’s time to give up. So I blow up a cooling tower (the plant was no longer operational anyway) and issue a statement saying we’re done with building these things, let’s be friends now. And wouldn’t you know it, it worked!

At least that’s the case for now. In a year from now, Iran will probably be gone and North Korea will still be pissing off the world only this time because they’re selling cheap electronics that break as soon as their out of the box.

So what’s my point? I don’t trust North Korea. I just don’t and it will take more convincing for me believe they really mean good. But I do believe this is a start spurred by Israel’s message to Iran. I would love for North Korea to disarm and for trade to resume. International trade is good for the U.S. (even if the goods are crap) and a world with less nuclear weapons is always a good thing. So thanks North Korea? It’s too early to tell.

Ralph Nader

I don’t have to say much on this post.

Ralph Nader, go home. You are not helping anyone, including yourself. You have done some great things in your life and have made a name for yourself as a consumer protection advocate. But don’t ruin that name by making another effort to run for president. YOU WILL NOT WIN. You know that, I know that, everyone knows that. You have tried before and America knows your name. Now stop. Please.

Engery

Energy is in my opinion, the most important issue facing our nation today. Terrorism and foreign threats are a big issue, but where do they get their money? From oil. So that, along with many other reasons that I will not go into detail about right now, is why I feel very strongly about the energy issue. But I am a bit frustrated with the ideas I am hearing from candidates this year. Lets hear what they’ve proposed.

McCain just proposed that the government hold a contest to find a car battery that can completely power a vehicle and can leap frog any current electric car on the market. The prize would be $300 million, about $1 from every U.S. citizen. I think this is a great idea and relatively low cost to the tax payer for such an important technology. But let’s talk about the other solutions for the energy crisis all candidates have made.

The first idea to get a lot of press and subsequently shot down was Hilary’s idea of a gas tax holiday. I am a democrat from New York and I did not care for Hilary and thought this idea was one of the worst I’ve ever heard. But at least she stood up and said “Here’s my idea. Where’s yours?” So eventually the other candidates starting talking. Obama has called for more “green” energy and investing in alternatives while bashing any idea of drilling for more oil. I intend to vote for Obama for a number of reasons, but I am concerned that when it comes to energy he talks about spending a lot of money in a lot of places with a very vague goal. McCain has always called for more oil drilling and has re-iterated that call lately by saying we need to drill off shore. The idea is to increases the amount of oil in production and bring down the price at the pump. Now here are the problems with all of these ideas.

Energy and oil prices come down to simple supply and demand. Politics are too concerned about saying the right things at the right time so that the right people hear them, instead of DOING the right thing. Oil is expensive, yes, but people all around the world are still buying it. This means that if the oil supply were to double overnight, the price would stay the same. How is this you ask? The trend has been for prices to increase with oil production remaining the same. More oil would mean that the prices would stay at the rates they are now ($4.26 for me). This is because the supply is simply MEETING the demand, not surpassing it. So McCain, drilling will not lower the price of oil. Granted remaining the same is better then increasing, but ideally we want the price to decrease. So how do we do that?

If we did not drill for more oil and just went after new energy sources, oil prices would increase more and not stop until we had a large source of alternative energy and then it would take years for that energy to become widely available to point where it would decrease oil prices. So the solution is to do both. In the sprit of free democracy, bi-partisan bills need to be passed to drill for more oil and invest in other sources. Drilling for more oil will help stop the massive increase in prices, and investing in other sources will drive demand for that other source, lowering the demand for oil. It is only at this point, when the DEMAND for oil decreases, that prices will decrease.

Still don’t believe me? You might be saying “Well now people are decreasing their demand for oil by buying smaller cars and driving less.” This is only partly true. Demand world-wide has been increasing over the past 10 years, more so in the last 3-5. This means that even if the U.S. started to taper their demand, they are still asking for more than before, just not as much more. The demand is still rising and it would take drastic changes to stop the demand from growing and even more drastic change to make the demand decrease. And even drilling in some parts of the U.S. won’t immediately help the U.S. This is because it is cheaper to sell oil from Alaska to China, Japan and other Asian countries than it is to transport it across the U.S. We will be drilling oil for others. (Yes it will help but not the way most people think it will.)

So that’s my 2 cents. If you feel I am wrong, or got someone’s position incorrect or just feel like commenting, PLEASE DO! Thank you.

Introduction

Hi Everyone. I am a 19 year old male. I am a registered independent, although I usually vote Democrat. I am from Rochester, NY but go to school in Charleston, SC and have lived there for two years now.

This is a blog about my views on the 2008 presidential election or any other political fiasco I feel so inclined to comment on.

Check out my other sites: http://www.bsilverstein.info/ & http://www.howlongcanthislast.blogspot.com/ & http://www.as-seen-on-youtube.com