Monday, May 07, 2007

Run of the Bulls

I agree with Kash about the value of Wind Generation to meet future needs for Electricity. It will become a necessary component in the electrical grid of the new development. What I find disturbing is the lack of definition in the use of Tides to generate electricity. Most Comment found in the area establishes of difficulty of Power translation in Tide use, then drops the entire discussion. I hold that a Hydraulic system connected to Sweep vanes could easily translate such Power, if two hoses lead to two separate cylinders to utilize both Rise and Withdrawal. Hereafter, it would be easy translation to a rotary Generator. Reclamation of Hydraulic fluid through Heat and Strain facilities even remains relatively easy. Overheating in such a system would not be a Problem, with Hose submersion. Tensile strength of Hose lines can easily be met, and outer Covering containment could assure no leakage to the sea. Speed of Turbine spin can be regulated by a bleeder tank system leading to altered angle cylinders. Engineers today are lucky I threw away my Sketch pad.

Dani Rodrik tries to explain that Trade is not a panacea for all economic ills, and specifically will not lead to a vast expansion in GDP. Household Incomes will not bound ahead because of freeing Trade from current restrictions. I have been trying to marshal a theoretical argument to show that an increase of Trade restrictions would not cripple economic growth, but might even propel increase of economic gain; this might take a while, due to lack of hard numbers in the area, though I will eventually reach what I know exists. The real element the Reader should integrate consists of thinking of Trade like it was the Paint job on a Car: too much Trade, like too much harsh weather, will wear through the Paint and start to rust the vehicle; too little Trade, like benign weather, will allow Dirt to accumulate on the vehicle–requiring a Body Wash. As far as Trade is concerned, I think it is Time that Rust Puddy and Primer be applied, and a new Coat of Restrictions should be imposed.

Tim Worstall has a fear that the connection between Productivity increases and Wages has been broken. The mystery Tim finds is not that Corporations do not have to invest due to rising Productivity, but that they are investing Overseas for cheaper Labor. No Productivity growth scales should exist which are not weighted with the degree of Labor Force participation. Transfer of difficult tasks to cheaper Wage foreign labor does not a Productivity Gain make. Readers must understand the current Corporate stance, as amplified by the Bush administration, may not be the best avenue for the American economy; what is good for Corporations have traditionally presented some great difficulty to the general Public. lgl

No comments: