Coal: Mining for Truth

I have mixed feelings about the purported war on coal.  I grew up in eastern Kentucky, and my father was an underground miner for over 30 years.  The coal industry is responsible for feeding and clothing me as a kid.  However, I'm also acutely aware of the environmental impact the industry has had on the region -- especially via mountain-top removal mining, or strip-mining.  Although the coal industry provides some of the best paying jobs in the region, the industry has a long history of profiting at the expense of the region's inhabitants.

I don't support the whole "Friends of Coal" movement.  I really don't care about coal, but I do care about hard working men and women who rely on coal jobs. I worry about regions that rely heavily on the coal industry for jobs.  I worry how those regions will adapt to inevitable changes in the energy industry.   

Leading up to the recent presidential election, I saw lots of vitriol directed at Obama regarding coal.  I saw posts on facebook that Obama was bad for coal and that he hated coal miners (see examples below). 

Given the mixed feelings that I have, I decided to do a little mining of my own to see if Obama really has been as bad for coal as his opponents have claimed.  I reviewed the Annual Coal Report from the U.S. Energy Information Administration for 2009, 2010, and 2011.  I wanted to see what has happened to coal mines, production, and jobs since Obama took office.  I also looked at data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics for trends in wages in the coal industry. 

As you can see in the graph below, both coal production and the number of operating mines have decreased since Obama took office.  However, mining jobs have actually increased both nationally and in the Appalachian region.  Eastern Kentucky, though, has seen significant decreases in mining jobs, as well as more drastic reductions in productions and mining operations.

In the three graphs below, I broke the above data into yearly changes.  Although there have been net decreases in coal production and number of operating mines, production and mines have actually seen increases nationally between 2010 and 2011.  Again, however, you can see that eastern Kentucky has suffered more severe decreases and smaller increases than Appalachia or the nation.

 

Finally, the graph below shows changes in average annual salaries in the coal mining industry since Obama took office.  Here, I have presented averages for the nation, for the entire state, and for a selected county in eastern Kentucky.  I chose Perry County because of it's rich coal history and because that's where my father worked in the mines.  Unlike other trends, Kentucky and Perry County saw greater than average increases in wages since Obama took office.  However, mining wages in Kentucky and Perry County still lag behind the national average.

Based on the actual numbers, I don't think anyone can honestly claim that Obama has wreaked havoc on miners.  Despite decreases in productivity and mining operations, the number of miners in the U.S. has actually increased since Obama was first elected.  I think the real question for both our government leaders and for coal companies is this:  Why has eastern Kentucky suffered more decreases in coal production and employment than Appalachia and the nation?


I can't help but wonder if the data in the graph below has something to do with eastern Kentucky's negative mining trend.

Stop whining and pay your taxes

I know I've mentioned this before, but can we finally stop demonizing poor people? 

Although the election is over, the rants about our entitlement culture are still raging.  But here's a simple fact:  All Americans - regardless of social class, race, gender, or age - have a sense of entitlement.  It's part of being American.  It's also part of living in a relatively affluent country.  We all benefit from the multitude of things provided by our government - federal, state, and local.  Whether it's food stamps, public schools, libraries, or roads and bridges, we all benefit.  And every disparate group of us wants to keep benefiting in whatever ways we've become accustomed to benefiting.

For some reason, though, many folks like to place their collective ire on poor people, who they label as entitled, undeserving, and greedily sucking from the government teat.  Being naturally curious, I wanted to now how much income goes to fund programs for the poor.    

If you're curious like me, check out this Federal Taxpayer Receipt application.  Since my illegally-wed wife and I can't file joint tax returns, I entered our tax information separately then added our individual tax contributions to get our household totals.  In 2011, my spouse and I paid a total of $17,543 in federal income and payroll taxes.  Fortunately for me, I like paying taxes, because I like most of things my taxes provide to me and my fellow Americans.  I don't like everything my tax dollars support, but that's just part of the compromise required for our social contract.   Still, the nifty thing about the taxpayer receipt is that it shows you how much of your income and payroll taxes go to various programs. 

To put my tax dollars in context, I compared them to two areas of discretionary personal spending in my household -- cable TV and Indian food - to see if I'm really over-taxed.  I looked at all areas of national defense spending, and I looked at programs I think most folks would consider "welfare" programs (TANF, SSI, food stamps, WIC, unemployment benefits, and Medicaid).  

In this first chart, you can see that more of my household's hard-earned money went to national defense programs than to welfare programs or to tasty Indian food and cable. 

In the second chart, I've broken things down more. 

 
In 2011, my spouse and I spent $1,257.89 on food at our favorite Indian restaurants.  Comparatively, only $429.46 of our federal income taxes went to support various food assistance programs (food stamps, WIC, and school lunch programs).  Let me help you with that math:  we spent nearly 3 times as much on curry as we contributed to food for the poorest inhabitants of our great country.  Additionally, we spent nearly 15 times as much on cable TV as we contributed to the temporary assistance for needy families (TANF) program. 

I'm an atheist, but even I think it would be immoral of me to complain about my tax dollars funding social safety net programs when my household has the discretionary income to spend $200 a month on curry and cable.  I could not possibly feel good about my life if I begrudged the least among us access to basic needs like food and shelter. 

So, if you have the good fortune to spend money on things that you want instead of just on things that you need, I have this to say to you:  Stop whining and pay your taxes! 

Need Affordable Healthcare? Grow a Tail.

Yesterday, my wife dropped our two young cats off at the vet to get spayed.  Our vet keeps animals overnight for observation with this procedure, so we picked them up from the vet this morning.

As I typically do, I reviewed our bill from the vet.  It cost us $124 to spay one cat.  Here's what we got for $124:

• Anesthesia
• An ovariohysterectomy
• Pain medications during surgery
• Medications for post-surgery pain
• Overnight care

So, basically, we got a hysterectomy and a 24 hour hospital stay for $124.

This begs the question:  Why the hell is healthcare for humans so damned expensive?

The cost for a human hysterectomy is typically $8,000 - $10,000.  That means it costs at least 65 times more for a human hysterectomy than an animal hysterectomy. 

Back in 2008, our shih tzu, Lexi, mysteriously punctured her eye.  Our regular vet performed emergency surgery to save her eye by suturing her cornea and covering it with a conjuctival flap.  She stayed in the hospital for 3 days.  The surgery, hospitalization, and all medications cost us $360.80.

The average cost of a day of inpatient hospital care for humans in Kentucky is around $1,500.   If Lexi had been human, her hospital say alone would have cost $4,500.

I'm not saying that the cost to treat humans should be as low as it is to treat animals.  But the gap in cost should not be so wide.  Humans are animals, after all.  Vets and doctors use many of the same basic medications and procedures.

The next time I'm sick or need surgery, I think I'm going to borrow a tail from my ex-husband and go to my vet instead of my doctor.  It couldn't hurt to try, right?

Low T

Maybe I've been watching too many late night infomercials, but I think I might be suffering from low T.  Over the past few months, I've found myself suffering from increased empathy. caring, and emotionality.  I've had multiple friends express concerns about my loss of butch vigor and credibility.  During the past 24 hours, though, it's become abundantly clear to me that I have a problem.

Currently, the wife and I are dog-sitting for our best friends.  They brought them over yesterday evening before leaving town.  The wife worked last night, so I was left to care for the dogs myself.  We have a two-story home, and one of the dogs has health problems that prevent her from going upstairs.  As bedtime drew near, I started feeling bad about going upstairs and leaving the dogs alone downstairs on their first night with us.  So what did I do?  I grabbed a pillow and blanket and slept on the couch in the living room, with one of the dogs sleeping on my feet and one of our cats sleeping on my chest. 

Then, this evening after work, I felt the sudden, overwhelming urge to go shopping for hair products and scented candles for myself.  And I did.

If this behavioral and emotional trend continues, I'm afraid I'll be wearing dresses by my next birthday.   

I think I'm on the verge of hitting bottom; my butch bottom.  Consider this my cry for help.  Is there a 12 step program for regaining your female masculinity?

 

Coffee vs. Food Stamps

I just spent $5.04 on a venti pumpkin spice latte at Starbucks.

In 2011, the average monthly food stamp benefit per recipient in KY was $127.60. That's $4.25 a day for food.

If you've ever spent more on one cup of coffee than a person on food stamps has to spend on a whole day of food and I hear you bitching about poor people living off the government, I will be inclined to punch you in the face.

Have a good weekend, y'all.

Too Porcine to Put to Death

Obesity leads to death, right?  Except, maybe, if you’re on death row.

I read an article this morning about Ohio death row inmate Ronald Post.  At 480 pounds, his legal defense is trying to avoid execution, arguing that any attempt to kill him via lethal injection would likely result in a “torturous and lingering death.”  From everything I’ve read, his current physical state could be described as a torturous and lingering death.

 

Apparently, the “too fat to be executed” defense has worked on occasion in the past.  In 1994, Mitchell Rupe, at over 400 pounds, was considered too hefty to hang in the state of Washington due to the risk of decapitation.   

Ok.  Let’s start with the obvious.  I’m not sure if the gentlemen mentioned were obese at initial incarceration or if it happened gradually overtime.  I mean, college freshmen tend to pack on 15 pounds during their first year of college.  Since prison is at least ten times worse and even more expensive than college, maybe new inmates pack on 10 times the weight - or 150 pounds - during their first year of incarceration.  But how on earth does someone reach or maintain that kind of weight in prison?  What are they feeding these guys?  Are death row inmates given a weekly ration of a 25 pound bucket of lard and spoon?  

 

Let’s look at Mitchell Rupe.  He actually avoided being hanged and lived another 12 years before dying in prison.  Here’s my question, though:  Is being decapitated really a more cruel and unusual death than just being hanged?  Judicial hanging typically uses a long-drop method, so that the person falls fast enough and long enough to instantly break his neck at the end of the fall.  In this scenario, the person loses consciousness in about a second or so.  Brain death occurs a few minutes later, and the death process is complete in about 15 – 20 minutes.  With decapitation, the brain tends to lose its electrical charge and cease functioning in less than a minute.  Other than it causing a bloody mess, I’m not convinced that decapitation is worse than hanging.

And, finally, let’s get back to the current case of Ronald Post.  Ohio uses lethal injection as its means of judicial execution, but Mr. Post’s defense has argued that lethal injection is too difficult to administer to a man of his size.  For instance, they state that the execution gurney won’t support his weight.  Can’t they borrow a gurney from one of the bariatric surgery centers in nearby Columbus, OH?  They also argue that starting the IV and administering the correct dosage to kill him will be difficult.  These, too, are specious arguments.  If you’re not sure how much pentobarbital to give Mr. Post, just triple or quadruple the amount you gave to last guy you successfully executed and that should do the trick.  If you can’t find someone skilled enough to start an IV in him, call a freakin’ equine vet.  If an equine vet can successfully euthanized an 1,100 pound horse, I’m pretty sure he/she could take out a 480 murderer.   

 

Seriously.  If Texas can executive an intellectually disabled man with an IQ of 61, surely Ohio can figure out how to lethally inject a fat man.

 

If we fat people want social acceptance, we have to stop insisting on special treatment.  Man up, big boy, and take your punishment.

That being said, if his defense works, I'll totally remember to pack on another 150 pounds before planning a killing spree.  

________________________________________

NOTE:  In all seriousness, I favor abolishing the death penalty (and not just for fat criminals).  For more information, check out the NCADP.