billeisele

Complicated topic with plenty of emotion, and opinions and beliefs on social norms, phobias, mental condition, bias, prejudices, personal beliefs, personal comfort and security, and more. Should a person be able to go to a private space and know that anyone else in there is of the same biological sex? Do their feelings matter? One solution would be to have three spaces: guys, girls and unisex. Everyone could make their choice and everyone is comfortable. Maybe that's too simple.

Phil - I'm not justifying anything. No where did I say anything even close to that. Only pointing out that there are plenty of bad actors on both sides of the fence. Some seem to forget that fact and act like the D's are angels. I get it, Trump has done plenty of bad stuff. But he is the elected President. Folks can be mad about it all they want, it won't change the outcome. No doubt he got a boost from the unsuccessful assassination, Obama's admonition to black males and Joe's timely garbage comment. One has to wonder if Joe did that on purpose. The shame is that there were two choices and they were both bad. 2.5 million more voters thought he was more capable despite his transgressions especially since he won all the swing states. One State I find most interesting is NC. They voted for Trump (51% - 48.7%) but every other state level position went Democrat. There were a whole bunch that voted split ticket.

I'm glad that Biden, Harris, Obama, Bill or Hillary, Ted Kennedy, Blagojevich, Menendez, Weiner, Corrine Brown, Chaka Fattah, Jesse Jacson, William Jefferson, Schumer and AOC never lied. "You can keep your doctor" "I never had sex with that woman" At least one party is honest.

Oh, so now he says unity and bipartisanship are needed. "I remind my colleages..." I guess he forgot about the last 4 years and what he said during the election. You have to wonder how any of these two-faced politicians sleep at night. He's just one example. There are plenty on both sides.

Jerry - certainly not. Was just commenting on the demand created by unchecked immigration. As some mentioned, we don't know how many are in houses, guests of existing homeowners, or many other facts. I'm aware of a few in my area and they live in rental houses. They are in construction and tree cutting, hard workers. I'm sure that's not true in all areas. I agree with Wendy on AirBnB and VRBO type companies. In my area the County is working on rules to manage short term rentals. In Charleston, Folly Beach, Isle of Palms and other surrounding areas they already did it. The problem I'm seeing (we have one 4 doors down the street) is the noise, trash and general disruption. About 1 out of 5 renters are a problem. It's on the lake and attracts fishermen, families and party groups. The owner is learning to screen them better. In my area lumber prices are back down to pre-Covid prices, other materials are up some and labor cost hasn't changed that much. I've not looked at the financial reports of large home builders, my guess is they are quite profitable. Last month I got quotes on 5 construction projects. One source is a homebuilder. Apples to apples, his quotes were 20-40% higher than the other contractors. The only significant difference is the high price guy has 1st and 2nd tier subcontractors, the others have 1st tier subs. What I don't know is their margins but suspect that's a contributing factor. The Zillow CEO made a public statement this week about his opinion of what will happen if mass deportation occurs. Lower demand and corresponding decrease in rent rates and decrease in house prices. We'll see what happens with deportation. There are many real issues to resolve on that issue.

Jerry - certainly not. Was just commenting on the demand created by unchecked immigration. As some mentioned, we don't know how many are in houses, guests of existing homeowners, or many other facts. I'm aware of a few in my area and they live in rental houses. They are in construction and tree cutting, hard workers. I'm sure that's not true in all areas. I agree with Wendy on AirBnB and VRBO type companies. In my area the County is working on rules to manage short term rentals. In Charleston, Folly Beach, Isle of Palms and other surrounding areas they already did it. The problem I'm seeing (we have one 4 doors down the street) is the noise, trash and general disruption. About 1 out of 5 renters are a problem. It's on the lake and attracts fishermen, families and party groups. The owner is learning to screen them better. In my area lumber prices are back down to pre-Covid prices, other materials are up some and labor cost hasn't changed that much. I've not looked at the financial reports of large home builders, my guess is they are quite profitable. Last month I got quotes on 5 construction projects. One source is a homebuilder. Apples to apples, his quotes were 20-40% higher than the other contractors. The only significant difference is the high price guy has 1st and 2nd tier subcontractors, the others have 1st tier subs. What I don't know is their margins but suspect that's a contributing factor. The Zillow CEO made a public statement this week about his opinion of what will happen if mass deportation occurs. Lower demand and corresponding decrease in rent rates and decrease in house prices. We'll see what happens with deportation. There are many real issues to resolve on that issue.

It's interesting that no one is connecting the dots of illegals needing a place to live decreases supply. To know if it's an issue one first has to know how many illegals there are. The last reliable number of 11 million was in 2022. In 2023 DHS reported 2 million that they interacted with. No idea on how many more weren't contacted. In SC they've noted that a large number of formally private residences are owned by housing corporations and investment groups. They buy them for rental. That takes those homes off the market for family ownership. That decreases supply. Who knows what the overall impact is.

Oh man, in SC Clyburn is an icon. Great example of why term limits are needed. He's 84 years old and won 60% in the election. He's wasted millions of fed $$ in this state and used his political power to enrich his daughter. Got her appointed to a prestigious State Board then leveraged that so-called experience to a federal job as a commissioner with the FCC. Somehow being the publisher of the family-owned newspaper made her the best candidate to be on the SC Public Service Commission. In SC those positions are appointed by a group of primarily politicians then voted on by the General Assembly. He crossed swords a few years ago with another politician over which candidate to support for the Mayor of the capital city. The former Mayor was to be Clyburn's successor but he supported a different person for Mayor so Clyburn is still there. Politics is nasty.

Analogous to Clintons statement, as reported by Time magazine, that half of Trump supporters belong in a basket of deplorables. Both are unacceptable statements.

Please stop making assumptions, you're better than that. Many of the issues/differences are known and understood. Some feel that being on a movie set means that there's no personal responsibility. With the movie-making rules, guidelines, etc. I see how one could have that conclusion. As we now know, rules don't always work, duh. I was brought up to check a firearm regardless of who gave it to me, regardless of if I had previously checked it or watched it being checked. For some that seems excessive but it ensures that there are no "accidental discharges." Seems that the movie peeps should modify their safety protocols. My issue is that Baldwin repeatedly and adamantly claimed that he didn't pull the trigger. Experts examined the gun and determined that it could not have gone off without the trigger being pulled. In his trial the attorney said in his opening statement, "Baldwin may be wrong, and that he may have pulled the trigger. He argued that would still not make him criminally negligent." The attorney also said, "He called the issue a “shiny object,” meant to distract from the key fact that the gun would have been harmless had it not been loaded with a real bullet — a grave violation of film industry safety standard." The Metz case has distinct differences. Willful, purposeful, no one handed him the gun saying it was safe, the person shot didn't die, etc. Wonder why he said, "oh s---, my gun went off." Trying for the Baldwin defense? Apparently to cryptic for some to follow. The Baldwin case disappeared due to legal technicalities, as it should have. The prosecution mishandled evidence. People don't remember details, what they remember are sound bites and summaries. What they remember is Baldwin killed someone and wasn't punished. Hopefully the Metz case will be different. My point was, and what was stated is, at the end of the day in both cases a guy pointed a gun, pulled the trigger and someone was shot. To say there are no similarities, as some have stated, is simply false.

Don't know if or how much of a difference it makes. The writer for the Post thinks it does.

If you say so. I didn't say it. Seems that the similarities are: someone pointed a gun, it went off, and someone got hurt. There will always be differences in the scenarios.

It's the Alec Baldwin defense. I didn't pull the trigger, it just went off. Crazy. This stuff won't be taken seriously if the 'special" people can get away with it.

Plenty of reasonable ideas. We should be moving in this direction. In SC there was a 17-year old arrested this week in possession of Glock switches that he purchased on-line. Not good that they are available.

Hadn't thought about it. Agree with what is said above. Looked up the award. It requires one to be a USPA member, have a C or D license and the jumps. There's no definition of how the jumps are done. She would also have the freefall time for the 12-hour award. To your question, if one only had front rides they most likely wouldn't have the qualifications for a license and wouldn't meet the award criteria. But, if one really wanted it, it seems that they could do the formation skydives and accuracy requirements. Fifty formation jumps, 10 with 4 or more people. Landing within 7' of a target on 100 jumps. I'd be OK if the award was given, it's not that big of a deal.

Another nice story. Are you following Kim Knorr and her goal to hit 1,000 jumps and get her Gold Wings? She started jumping in 1959 and won gold in 4-way at the World Championships in 1962. Stopped jumping and restarted in 2003. She's traveling the country in her van making tandem jumps. She was at our DZ earlier this year. Last I heard she was over 700 jumps. Amazing spry and energetic for 85-years old.

Other than voting for folks that don't want to expand government or subsidies I'm not sure what any individual can do that would be effective. Sure we can write our elected folks but not sure that does anything. I have no comprehensive knowledge of what all the subsidies are or how they're tangled together. Did some reading. This is a quote from a Hoover Institue paper linked below, "Uncle Sam doled out nearly $100 billion in taxpayer subsidies. These welfare payments come in every conceivable shape and size: government grants, sweetheart business deals arranged by the Commerce Department, cut-rate insurance, low-interest loans, a protective wall against foreign competition, exclusive government contracts, and a mind-boggling maze of special interest loopholes in the tax code." Welfare for the Well-Off: How Business Subsidies Fleece Taxpayers | Hoover Institution Welfare for the Well-Off: How Business Subsidies Fleece Taxpayers Using this one item as an example, "In 1997 the Forest Service spent $140 million building roads in national forests, thus subsidizing the removal of timber from federal lands by multimillion-dollar timber companies. Over the past twenty years the Forest Service has built 340,000 miles of roads--more than eight times the length of the interstate highway system--primarily for the benefit of logging companies." One has to wonder what the impact would be on products made from wood if the lumber companies had to pay for the roads. What gets cut, how much, which goes first, how does it impact the cost of finished products, etc.? There are plenty of questions to answered and it appears that there are few or no politicians willing to tackle it.

Uhhhh ... NO. Disagree with your conclusion. I'm not a fan of subsidies. I realize they're out there and many things have them. I distinctly remember that when the ethanol legislation was passed John McCain stated, "It would be the largest farm subsidy in history." As stated, some subsidies have been around for years. No doubt they couldn't be instantly unraveled but I'd be in favor of moving in that direction. Kinda like shrinking the size of government. Strategic analysis with decisive reductions. Granted, it's a huge list and would be almost impossible to untangle it.

Interesting perspective and grossly simplistic. Yes the utility earns a profit on the delivery of service. That includes much more than generation. For the local utility, YE 2023 the actual margin was less than 4%. the authorized rate of return is 9.5%. The utilities in my area have an all-inclusive rate. It includes the cost of generation, step-up transformation, transmission, step-down transformation, distribution, another step-down transformation, metering, and 24-hour call service. If each component of the service were priced individually the customer would have clarity. The utility is forced to buy the excess solar generation at the full retail rate that's inclusive of that list of services. The only component that's being avoided is generation. That's not competition it's a subsidy. OK fine, if the solar person should get a profit then set it appropriately. If the cost of generation is 3.5 cents and the solar peep earns the authorized rate of return then they would get 3.8 cents not the 13 cents that they are getting. Unfortunately for the 99% of non-solar owners the utility is not the one gifting the subsidy it's the customers. The utility collects the funds and redistributes them.

Subsidies come in many different forms. There's tax support for all kinds of things and some of it has been around for years. As for solar in SC there are two subsidies. There's the tax savings by investing in solar and the kWh subsidies. The State gives a tax break worth 25% of the solar system value. It's capped at $3,500 or 50% of the tax liability whichever is less. The regulated utilities are required to provide heavy subsidies. They pay the solar owners the full retail rate for any generation sent to the grid. It's about 13 cents / kWh. One issue with that is the cost of generation is in the 2.5 - 4.5 cents range, depending on when the power is generated. That's what the utility actually saves. The solar owner receives a subsidy of 8.5 - 10.5 cents / kWh. The typical system generates excess energy when the cost of generation is in the low range. The subsidies, for ease of discussion, are about 10 cents / kWh. In addition, the $9.50 basic facilities charge doesn't collect revenue to support the grid. For a solar user that means that they pay little to nothing for the grid. Yet the grid is there and it's being maintained so that they will have power when the solar system output is less than the home requires. This is not uncommon across the US but it's being addressed in some jurisdictions. The utility collect the funds to pay the subsidies from all rate payers. The 99% of non-solar users are subsidizing the 1%. There's a line item change on the bill to collect the funds for energy efficiency programs and solar payments. It's called Distributed Energy Resource charge. My estimate is that the local utility collects approximately $1.15 million a month. I have no clue what the ratio of the funds is for energy efficiency or solar. Some of the Co-Ops in SC understood this issue and modified their rate structure. For residential customers they use a time-of-use rate with an energy charge of 5.2 cents, a peak hours (3 hours a day) demand charge of $12/kW, and raised the basic facility charge to $28.50 a month. What this does is: 1) provides a direct incentive that rewards behavior to shift the usage out of the peak period, 2) eliminates some or most of the subsidy for solar, and 3) allows a solar user to pay a "fair share" of the grid costs. How does #3 happen. The higher basic facility charge collects money to support the grid as does the demand charge. It would be rare for the solar user to provide 100% of their needs during the peak hours. It only takes one day a month with clouds, rain, etc. to cause the solar user to draw all their power from the grid. That's when the demand charge collects the grid costs. If the electric water heater runs for 20 minutes it will cost $18 for the month. If 3 tons of HVAC runs for 30 minutes it will cost $20 for the month. The lights, TV, and plug loads can easily add another $10 - $20. The demand charges add up quickly. If the solar user has a big battery system they might avoid those charges. With this type rate structure the subsidies are minimal and the economics for solar provide no payback.

Good morning. The sources are direct comments by soldiers that served with him (and I clearly stated that they could be biased), CNN, his Governors website and the Congressional record. If those sources aren't sufficient which ones would be acceptable? The problem is the perception he's either created or allowed to exist in both his bios. According to the CSM I spoke with the military folks take this stuff seriously. It can't be glossed over, pushed aside or redefined. To Jerrys question: No I did not serve in the military. It's definitely not the same but I've worked with the DoD for 30+ years interacting with civilian DoD employees, enlisted folks all the way up to Base Commanders in the Army, Navy, Marine Corp, Air Force and National Guard at Fort Jackson, Parris Island, Naval Weapons Station, Marine Corps Air Station, two Navy Hospitals, Shaw AFB, McEntire ANG Base, USCG Charleston and others like Army Corps and NAVFAC. All that says is I have some experience with the military. My distaste for politics continues. Certainly we have better people that any of the current candidates.

No one is denying his honorable service. No one is denying what Trump did. The comments aren't comparing Trump and Walz. Was he a CSM, yes. He clearly knew that wasn't permanent. Most reading the bios would think that he retired as a CSM. At best it's misleading. The bio links were provided. The CNN link is below. The not good comment was directed as his claims that are false. The CSM claim is in his Governor bio and in in his congressional bio. Both those links were provided. Both of which he had years to correct. The two guys making the accusations served with Walz. These are not R Swift Boating talking points. Here's the CNN report on the weapons at war topic. The more this stuff is denied the worse it gets. CNN fact-checks Tim Walz about ‘absolutely false’ claim he carried weapons 'in war' (msn.com)

The things the talking heads say is questioned and none was posted. The quotes from the two guys isn't questioned, except to say that's their reality and some is their opinion. If in fact his governor's website bio says he's a CSM, and further says that he carried a gun in war, those are problems. Found this bio Governor Tim Walz / Office of Governor Tim Walz and Lt. Governor Peggy Flanagan (mn.gov) and it says, "After 24 years in the Army National Guard, Command Sergeant Major Walz retired from the 1-125th Field Artillery Battalion in 2005." Not good. Found this bio as a US Congressman. It says, "Walz enlisted in the Army National Guard at the young age of 17, and retired 24 years later as Command Sergeant Major. Before retiring, Walz served overseas with his battalion in support of Operation Enduring Freedom." We know that's incorrect. Who wrote it, we have no clue. Did Walz know about it and not correct it, also no clue. I guess it's possible that he wouldn't know about it but that's kinda difficult to believe. HHRG-115-HA00-Bio-WalzT-20170215.pdf (congress.gov)

I'm confused. Don't see what the non-point is. I presented the info that some asked for. I have no clue if these guys are biased or have an axe to grind. Some of what they stated is their opinion. Others could have the opposite opinion. I have no clue who Walz is, and I suspect that most others don't eighter. All we have is what's being reported. I don't trust any of the media. Direct statements from people that know the guy have weight.

Quotes from 2 men that served with Walz. Who knows if these two guys are credible and if their statements are accurate. The quotes were made during a FOX interview. If it was the FOX talking heads that said the words I'd be skeptical. Spoke with a CSM friend at the monthly AUSA meeting at Fort Jackson on Wednesday. He said that they take that rank seriously and it's inappropriate for anyone to claim that rank if they didn't achieve it. Command Sgt Major Thomas Behrends (retired) served with Gov Waltz has accused him of embellishing his time in the service and abandoning his unit just before they deployed. Behrends, who said he was a member of Walz's battalion, scolded the Minnesota governor for misleading the American public about his military career. His service concluded when he retired from his unit in the Minnesota National Guard right before they deployed to Iraq in 2005. Asked about Trump running mate Sen. JD Vance's accusation that Walz is guilty of "stolen valor," the National Guard veteran said that it's "far darker than a lot of people think." "He's used the rank that he never achieved in order to advance his political career," he said. "I mean, he still says he's a retired command sergeant major to this day, and he's not. He uses the rank of others to make it look like he's a better person than he is." Waltz is described as a retired "command sergeant major" in his governor's website biography and has also claimed he carried a gun "in war," despite never experiencing active combat. The Minnesota National Guard has said that he retired as a master sergeant. "To most people, that would mean that he was actually in combat, carrying a weapon in a combat zone and getting combat pay and in a dangerous and hostile environment where he is getting shot at," Behrends said. "I mean, if he thinks Italy was a combat zone or a war zone and he was carrying that in war, he's delusional," he added. Behrends said Walz had been promoted to command sergeant major in 2004, but claimed he was required to serve two additional years or the promotion would be void. His early retirement terminated the promotion, reducing his rank to master sergeant, Behrends said. "What he did, basically, was he quit. He didn't complete that condition of doing two years after graduation, so he gets reduced to a master sergeant, and that's what he is right now, is a retired master sergeant." "From what I get from the soldiers that I went to Iraq with, probably 98% of them are completely against him embellishing his record," he said. "Don't try to make it look like you were a command sergeant major. Don't try to make it look like you were going to some place that was in support of Operation Enduring Freedom… that's just all embellishment and lies to try to make things look better." Tom Schilling, who also said he was a member of Walz's battalion, slammed his actions as "dishonorable." "I have my stories about what he did to the military, when he left us like that, and I was kind of like, ‘Are you kidding me?’" Schilling said, recalling his reaction when he heard Harris tapped Walz as her running mate. "We all did what we were supposed to do, we did the right thing, and it's dishonorable what he did," Schilling said. "He left somebody else to take over his spot. He just ditched us."