Tesla's Waiting For What?!?

I just read an article about the upcoming Tesla Model S sedan. It looks awesome and as I was reading it I was excited about the possibilities, despite the initial cost still being kind of high (unless you were going to buy an expensive sedan anyway). Anyway, what got me was this:

He also indicated that Tesla believes that it is close to receiving $350 million in loans from the U.S. Department of Energy to build a plant in California that would manufacture the Model S.

Whiskey tango foxtrot? The Department of Energy? Why? If this product is so destined to make a mint (as its founders obviously think it will), and will change the landscape of American (and world) automobiles, then why aren't investors lining up to drop down the dough to get this thing started? Why does the government have to come in here and essentially create a market where, apparently, there isn't one desired?

You can't tell me that there aren't enough 'green' richies out there that wouldn't love to have everyone driving electric cars. Why can't they invest in this company?

I'm left to assume that either: 1)There in fact ISN'T a market for this car, 2)Their marketing plan isn't sound and has potential investors nervous, or 3)It's just easy to get government money for anything green, and they figure it's the path of least resistance.

This same type of scenario came up in the comments of my comment on government-supported basic research, and I still am subscribing to the Field of Dreams analogy. If you can sell it, they'll come with money. It's not that complicated.

Then again, maybe neither is getting money from the Dept. of Energy.

Rights...or Wrongs?

As Americans, we have the right to enjoy life; to be happy. We have the right to obtain employ in the service of another. We have the right to decent housing arrangements. We have the right to affordable health care. We have the right to demand accommodation at a place of business of our choice.

Right?

Wrong. They are all wrong. As Americans we have none of these so-called rights.

Huh? But I thought--

No; you thought wrong. You do not have the right to enjoy your life or to be happy. You have the right to pursue happiness. It's an important distinction. Nobody except you can guarantee your happiness. This is a fundamental flaw in some people's minds. They either feel that somebody (usually government, but sometimes individuals or businesses) owes them something in order to appease them. They feel it is their "right", but it is most certainly not.

How about a job? Surely we have the right to work? Wrong again. It ties into the fact that nobody owes anybody anything in regards to happiness. Would a job be nice? Would it help get/keep you on your feet? Sure! But does that mean it's your right to have a job? Certainly not! This country was set up on the principle that if you bust your ass and work hard you may be able to make something of yourself and find employment. You certainly have the right to exercise your free will and attempt to better yourself. If you don't get anything out of doing that (or don't even bother attempting) then that sucks for you, but that's life. Nobody (especially the government) owes you any sort of job. As such, it is most certainly not a right afforded anyone in the Constitution.

So no right to a house? Definitely not. You have the right to not be discriminated against when purchasing a house, but that does NOT mean that if you can't pay the bill, that not selling you the house is some sort of discrimination based on class or poverty level. If you don't have the dough, you shouldn't get the digs. And nobody under any circumstances has the right to own their own home. Nobody has the right to even rent a home. I'm sure most if not all Americans want everyone to have their own home, but that doesn't make it a right.

You don't have the right to affordable health care. You have the right to not be killed, to be sure, but nobody owes you medical treatment unless you pay for it (or have pre-paid through insurance) This can be both unfortunate and sticky. While I don't support government-run health care, I do know that health care costs can quickly skyrocket for someone who is hospitalized. Most of the time, the monetary level of the person is indirectly proportional to the amount of medical costs they run up. The problem is far too complex for me to solve, but it seems to me it needs to be handled from both ends. If there are those reliant on government assistance, then they should be required to abide by certain restrictions which would ensure their health level to be as high as it can be. Otherwise the government is just dropping money down a hole. On the other end of the spectrum, insurance companies screw around with medical practices, not paying on time, refusing payment, underpaying, etc. (Yes, I speak from experience) This causes the doctors to raise prices to compensate, which then causes insurance companies to be even bigger sticklers. To top it off, frivolous lawsuits cause the doctor's malpractice insurance costs to skyrocket, which also forces doctors to raise prices to compensate. In essence, the biggest problem is that it's a continual cycle that just keeps spiraling out of control without check. As an aside - did you know that around the turn of the century (the one before the last), doctor visits cost 25 cents? House calls were 50 cents. Can you believe that? It can't possibly get back to anything close to that with our new expensive technologies, but it was still an amazing factoid.

Sorry - got off topic a bit there. Suffice it to say that while it does suck for a lot of people, it is not their right to have affordable health care. It is (imho) most definitely a privilege. Unless they amend the Constitution, then it will stay that way.

The final one I mentioned was the right to demand accomodation at your desired place of business. This is the one that seems to be most-utilized by those screaming about their rights being infringed. I wrote a post a while ago about eHarmony caving in to gay people who were screaming about their rights being infringed because they couldn't find gay partners on eHarmony's website. It was and is a ridiculous assertion that anyone should be able to demand service in this manner. You can't sue a business for having an American flag in its window just because you're from, say, Croatia, and they don't have a Croatian flag in there too. You can't force a business to sell free-range fed chicken just because you don't like hormone-infused meat. You can't demand a business owner converse with you in English, even when it's clear they cannot. I could go on, but you get the point. You, as the consumer, have the right to go anywhere you please to shop, but you do NOT have the right to have a business cater to your needs. As long as that business owner is not breaking any laws, they are within their full rights to conduct their business how they see fit. You, as the consumer, should just go somewhere else.

Far too often in this country, somebody's presumed rights trounce all over somebody's actual rights. Again, far too often, our judicial and legislative branches allow this trouncing to occur without impedement.

Can you think of any other rights that are...wrong?

An End to the Debate

I was watching a video clip the other day of Obama giving some answers about when does life begin. He stated that it was something he had not fully formed his opinion on at that time. However, I'd say based on his voting record in Chicago, his opinion was already well formed, but that's not the purpose of this post.

I would say that at some time during my life, I too have felt that "my opinion was not fully formed" as well. I don't remember when exactly, but I'm certain it was before I had my own children. However, after watching that clip, an explanation popped into my head and I felt the need to express it. For me, and I would hope others as well, completely and nicely concludes exactly when life begins - and there is really no more room for logical debate (not that there ever was). A friend pointed out to me that there will always be room for illogical debate, but you can never win with an illogical thinker. 

To begin with, let's think about what is involved with creating life; in this case a human baby. You have to have a sperm cell, and that cell has to fertilize a human egg cell. That product multiples and grows into what will eventually become a baby. It seems a lot of this debate centers around exactly when does that "product" become a lifeform. The question is easier than it has been made out to be. 

Does life begin when the sperm and egg are created? No. Too early.

Does life begin when the heard starts beating? No. Too late.

Does life begin when the baby is born? Heavens no!

Life begins at the precise instant that the egg has been successfully fertilized. There is no question to this, and the fact there's even a "debate" is a bit ridiculous.

Let's look at an analogy. Let's say you're making a sandwich. You have the bread and you have the ham. Is it a sandwich yet? Obviously not. You take a slice of bread, put some ham on it, and then top it off with another piece of bread. Is it a sandwich? Of course it is! It didn't become a sandwich when you ate it, and it wasn't a sandwich before you put the pieces together. 

How about this one: you're in a marathon. All the runners are lined up and the starting signal is given. When did the race start? Obviously, right from when the signal is given. At that exact instant, a process was begun: the process of running the race. As long as there is no outside intervention, the race will continue and will complete. Before the signal, there were just a bunch of runners milling around. If they were never given the signal, they would obviously have never run the race. The process had a definite beginning, middle, and end. 

Just like life. 

If you left the sperm cells alone, nothing would change with them. They can't, on their own, grow into anything. The same goes for an egg. So, naturally, life does not begin with these cells in this state. However, when they are combined and the egg is fertilized, a new entity has been created that will, barring outside influence, grow into a baby. Do you see the distinction? You can't say that life begins anywhere in that line of events after fertilization (heartbeat, brain formed, born, etc.) because those are just different phases in the process. Before there were two cells; after there was something new and completely unique that didn't even exist before.

When that sperm cell fertilizes the egg cell, a process has begun. 

That process...

...is life.

There is really no room for logical debate.

A Journey Through DirecTV Hell

I recently was notified by DirecTV that HD locals were now available in my area, and I (of course) readily agreed to an upgrade. I had been waiting for this before I made the switch to HD. I got a free DVR out of the deal as well as a new free dish, plus the free installation to boot. Yippee.

So everything is awesome until the new free receiver in the bedroom starts acting up. I'm a reasonably technical guy, but I couldn't get it to keep working. A restart always worked, but that's rather annoying, to say the least. I finally called and after some "technical" support, she agreed with my assessment. As an aside - I wish there was some magic code word you could tell tech support that would get you past all the BS they make you go through.

"Ok, sir, let's try restarting the device."
--As if that's not the first dang thing I did.

"Now what I want you to do is unplug it, wait 30 seconds, and then plug it back in."
--DUH. That was my natural step next too.

...and so on. But I digress.

So the solution was to send me out a replacement, which I would receive in 3-5 days, and I would return the defective unit. Case closed.

Only it wasn't.

Fast forward a week and I have no replacement. I call and they say it hasn't shipped. They say it'll ship out the next week, after the holiday. I wait.

A week passes. No replacement. I call again; now it's the 8th of January. After some initial tracking down of the problem, her supervisor informs her that they are out of stock and it will ship as soon as they get more. Meanwhile, she lets slip that "That's why you haven't received your R16."

Eh? R16 you say? But no ma'am, I have an R22. Why are you sending me an R16? She has no answer, hence she forwards (dismisses) me to another rep. The next guy understands my plight but is unable to assist. I offer to go to Best Buy to buy the model I need and have them reimburse me. No bite. He forwards me on to Tech Support, which, according to him, is the only division allowed to create orders. Perhaps they can request a specific model number. This lady was a little bitchy right from the get go, and was flustered at my request. I again offer to go out of my way to make the purchase, but am denied again. I offered to have one of their local installers bring one out or I could go pick it up from them, but again, denied. Finally, she somehow she was able to place an order for an R22 and have it shipped overnight. Finally, I thought.

Turns out I think too much.

The next day I see that my order has been created and right next to the order it plainly lists "ERP_R15C_R Group".

Notice anything odd? That's right: R15!! Not even an R16 they were going to shaft me with before! This one is an even EARLIER model!!

So, I get the box the next day and lo and behold, it's a damn R15. I call them Monday (that's this past Monday, the 12th), ready to curse them into submission. I'm met by a clueless CSR to whom I recite the entire story again. I again offer to go to Best Buy. Denied. I again offer to meet with an installer. Again, denied. She forwards me on to Tech Support (haven't I been here before..?) where I actually get a nice lady. I again make my same offers of appeasement. She rejects them all, saying they can't do that. She says they can't request a specific model number, but they used to be able to. I'm cursing the frickin person who made THAT brilliant executive decision... She tells me that I'm going to need to talk to a resolution specialist to get this problem solved. She tells me she has marked it urgent and I should get a call within 2-3 hours.

I couldn't believe it, but 2 hours later they called!!

I lied; the bastards didn't call. I got no call all night, and none the next morning either. So I call back, at what is now 24 hours since I was supposed to get a call back. I speak with someone who is the most clueless of all, so she forwards me on to equipment, where I get to speak with an installation expert. Yeah, that's exactly who I need: someone to troubleshoot my receiver installation...oh wait - I don't have one yet!!

So this girl is the most bitchy of anyone so far. She is already having a bad day and apparently I didn't improve matters. For what it's worth, ditto for me. I make the same offers to her. Can you send me an R22? No we can't. We just tell the warehouse to send a DVR. Can I go to Best Buy to get an R22 and you apply a service credit? No, we're not going to pay you back for you going to a retailer. Can you have an installer meet me with that equipment? No, we can't specify installation equipment.

Well then, Miss Sunshine, we have a problem here. I say, "I am NOT going to give you a SUperior piece of equipment for an INferior piece of equipment. That doesn't even make sense."

Silence. Dead frickin silence for 45 seconds. I am not exaggerating. "Hello?" I say. "I'm still here sir, but nothing has changed. So, what do you want to happen here?" I tell her I'd like to talk to the resolution department and get this matter resolved. She tells me they have no such department. "Well then," I say, "I'd like to speak with whoever was supposed to call me yesterday." She tells me that the notes say a supervisor was going to call. THEN LET ME TALK TO A SUPERVISOR. (I didn't yell, but I sure felt like it...) "Hold on, let me see if I can find one."

So a supervisor comes on, and Angie, thou holiest of DirecTV Angels, comes to save the day.

A - "Sir, how can I help you today?"
J - "Well, I'm sure your CSR has probably caught you up, right?"
A - "Yes, she has. I understand you'd like a specific receiver sent to you?"
J - "Well, yes. I'd like my receiver to be replaced with the same model that I'm returning."
A - "I understand, sir, but we really can't specify particular models for equipment replacement."
[Ugh...here we go again...]
J - "But that doesn't really make sense, does it? I'm giving you a new model, albeit broken, for an older, discontinued model? How's that right?"
A - "We can only specify the type of receiver, and the R15, R16, and R22 are the current models in that particular line-up."
J - "But.."
A - "If I could make a suggestion, sir. If you'd really like to get the particular model you're looking for, you might want to go to Best Buy or Circuit City and purchase that one, then I'll just apply a service credit to your account to cover the lease fee you'd pay at those retailers."

[....Did I just hear that correctly?]
That's right, folks. The very solution I had proposed to EVERY SINGLE REP FROM EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT I SPOKE WITH was just PROPOSED TO ME. I was dumbstruck.

J - "That's absolutely what I'd like to do. I have suggested it to everyone and been denied every single time. I wasn't trying to be difficult, and was offering to go out of my way to make everyone happy."
A - "I understand sir, and I'm sorry this wasn't cleared up way back in December. I will inform the rep you just spoke with of this solution, and let her know that it is a viable solution in the future."
J - "Well, just so you know, you might want to send out a memo or something to every other rep I've been in contact with, because they didn't know either."

And that was that. I got the credit applied to my account within 5 minutes and I got the receiver that very night. To be truthful I actually got an upgraded receiver for twice the cost, but since they had reimbursed me for half, it was like I got it for half price.

See, here's the thing most people don't know about DirecTV's newest receivers, including, apparently, the reps that service them. The price you pay at Best Buy is NOT an ownership fee, but rather a LEASING fee. That's right, you don't own the boxes at all; they are leased equipment. If you were to cancel your service, you'd have to return them. If you were to buy the equipment, it would cost much, much more. So that's why I even proposed this solution, because I knew I wasn't actually paying Best Buy, I was paying the same as I would at their website, only it should/would be free since they were going to send me a replacement.

So, all in all I spoke with 9 reps and 1 supervisor across 3 departments, all in the quest of getting the same model I was returning, which I had no idea would be an ordeal to begin with.

Lessons learned? Be persistent. Don't get pushed around. Get names. It didn't particularly help in this situation, but it never hurts. Finally, know your stuff. When the really bitchy lady suggested there's no real difference between the different models, I was ready and rattled off every difference from their tech specs. She responded with muted silence.

Advice for DirecTV: 9 out of 10 people would probably be just dumb and happy with whatever model they got, but my techy mind just couldn't allow a model degradation to one with reduced features/disk space. Save those R15s and R16s for the people who don't know any better For those that do, just give them a damn R22 and save everybody the hassle.

To eHarmony: Grow a Pair

In case you didn't hear about this, someone sued eHarmony.com a few years ago for not catering to his particular taste of partners. He couldn't find suitable partners on the site and thus declared the site was discriminating against him. I'm sure you've already assumed, but I'll clarify here: the man is gay. He was complaining about not having the option to be matched with other gay men.

Fast forward to this past week. eHarmony has settled this case. That's right - they sold out. The end result is that they have to pay the legal fees and other expenses of the attorney general's office ($50,000) as well as $5,000 to the man himself - let me guess - for pain and suffering. In addition, the business has to create a new website that solely caters to the gay and lesbian community; they're calling it Compatible Partners. They're giving the first 10,000 users free accounts and will be kept completely separate (database, etc.) from their regular site.

Now, on the surface, this issue seems like a gay issue. Don't be fooled - it's not. In a very real sense, this is just one more case of a company being trapped into making a so-called politically correct decision simply not to offend anyone. I contend that their decision was weak-kneed and will only set a precedent that need not be set.

Let's just forget about the whole gay aspect. It's not relevant to what happened. What essentially happened here is that an individual decided to go to a business and be served, only to discover the business didn't serve anything he liked. Normal people would go to another business that does serve what they like. Not so with Mr. I'm-a-minority (be it religion, race, sexual orientation, language). Mr. I.A.M. feels put down and trounced upon and wants every place he chooses to do business with to cater to HIM. Unfortunately for us without a minority mindset, I.A.M. wins more and more in our court system.

In this particular case, the charge was ridiculous. eHarmony.com is a private business. As long as it doesn't break any laws it can do whatever it wants. And - here's the kicker - both the company and even the attorney general agreed that no laws were broken! So why settle?!? It baffles the mind. At least - the normal mind. Let's take this analogy. I'm a carnivore. I love meat. Let's say I'm walking in a shopping center and I see a vegan market store. We'll suspend reality here for a second and say I walk in to this store to purchase some meat. What do I find? Steaks? Hamburgers? Pork Chops? NO?!?!? How could they! They are discriminating against meat-eaters! I'LL SUE!!!

(You see how ridiculous it is when you remove the I.A.M. slant?)

Here's a thought: Let's say that eHarmony.com doesn't give in. I don't call that discrimination - I call it a business opportunity! If there are that many people interested in finding a gay partner online, then there should be websites devoted to it! If I were gay that's where I'd go! You see - that's one of the benefits of our country; if someone sees a need for a product/business/idea, then they can fill that void with something that consumers will purchase. In some cases they can create a market where none existed before.

I wish people who felt disenfranchised didn't always look to the courts to solve their problems. I'm not saying the courts are never an option, but it's not like there weren't other alternatives for the dude - there are websites that cater to just about every type of partner-interest one might have. Nobody was forcing him to use eHarmony. He chose to implicate this business - this private, law-abiding business - in his own little "I'm a victim"-mentality-induced crusade, and the company just gave up. The real crime here is that he should have never been allowed his day in court. That would have saved everybody some dough.

The real scoop - the real reason this was even pursued - was because eHarmony has long been the bane of the gay community. The site/company was founded by a former affiliate of Focus on the Family - an evangelical Christian, Dr. Neil Clark. He designed the site and their formulas specifically to match heterosexual couples. Since this suit in 2005, at least one more was launched last year in California. Same concept - same goal - same I.A.M. mentality. By the way - this one is a class action lawsuit, and even the attorney for the plaintiff says,

This lawsuit is "about changing the landscape and making a statement out there that gay people, just like heterosexuals, have the right and desire to meet other people with whom they can fall in love."

I don't agree with his comment about "everybody has the right...". Nobody has the right to meet anyone. They may have the desire, for sure, but they definitely don't have the right. I'm pretty sure that nowhere in the Constitution does it say, "We all have the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and to meet our future lover." Maybe I missed that day in Civics class. To be sure - it would be nice if every company you wanted to do business with catered to you, but that's just not how it works in this country. If enough people want a business to change, the business will change. Obviously, eHarmony didn't feel the need to change to cater to the gay community and were staying as is. Could they have made more money had they done so? Probably. But again, not enough people wanted that service from them, so they didn't feel the business need to change.

The irony of this is that now that eHarmony is in the game, they will undoubtedly take business away from existing sites that specifically designed themselves to cater to the gay community. They have been so successful with the hetero market, who's to say they won't be just as successful with their new venture? What one hand giveth, the other taketh away...

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go sue that damn vegan store for not selling sirloins.

Bastards.