This is the final column in a set of three regarding life-saving procedures. If you missed the first two, you’re in luck, because they are located right below this one. You should note that all three columns involve driving. That says something that we should all know: we spend a lot of time on the road, and it is a dangerous environment.
The following story was relayed to me via email from a friend. It contained one of those all-too-common advisories that I should “forward it to at least ten friends.” As always, I tend to research those messages even more thoroughly prior to taking any action. Below is what I discovered about the warning.
This is no joke and it could save your life! I wonder how many people know about this ~ A 36-year-old female had an accident several weeks ago and totaled her car. A resident of Kilgore, Texas, she was traveling between Gladewater & Kilgore. It was raining, though not excessively, when her car suddenly began to hydroplane and literally flew through the air. She was not seriously injured but very stunned at the sudden occurrence!
When she explained to the highway patrolman what had happened he told her something that every driver should know - NEVER DRIVE IN THE RAIN WITH YOUR CRUISE CONTROL ON. She thought she was being cautious by setting the cruise control and maintaining a safe consistent speed in the rain.
But the highway patrolman told her that if the cruise control is on when your car begins to hydroplane and your tires lose contact with the pavement, your car will accelerate to a higher rate of speed making you take off like an airplane. She told the patrolman that was exactly what had occurred.
If you send this to 15 people and only one of them doesn't know about this, then it was all worth it. You might have saved a life.
NOTE: Some vehicles (like the Toyota Sienna Limited XLE) will not allow you to set the cruise control when the windshield wipers are on.
I had seen this warning somewhere before, and I was curious about the origins, so I went to Snopes to see what the Mikkelsons had to say. The reference I found was for the same story, but the “recent” accident turns out to have happened in 2002 or 2003.
The facts seem to be genuine, so the alert is one that should be heeded. However, Barbara “spin control” Mikkelson included some additional advice from a driver who had apparently had a similar driving experience.
When road conditions are at all hazardous—rain, sleet, snow or ice—speed should be reduced. Driving at 65-70 miles-per-hour on a slick pavement is highly dangerous. Slow down.
To that advice, I add my own. If you drive a vehicle with an automatic transmission and you are in the above conditions, slow down and shift from overdrive into ‘D’ or the numbered gears.
You won’t be using the highest gear, but the ratio is 1:1, meaning that the transmission is on the same speed as the wheels. You have much better control on wet pavement and on hills, too, because the engine is doing some of the braking for you.
Most people don’t ever use the lower, non-overdrive position on their gearshift. However, if you read your driver’s manual that came with the vehicle—another step that many people skip—you will see that specific gear selection is recommended for conditions where you want to avoid unnecessary gear shifting in the auto transmission. It also avoids overspeed and wheel spinning of the type that is described in the anecdote above.
Driving in mountains is another road condition that calls for use of the lower gears instead of overdrive. You will likely use a bit more gasoline or diesel fuel, but you will have much more control, especially on the downgrades.
There are differences in where the overdrive gear is located and how it is marked on the shift display, so I recommend that you get your owner’s Manual out of the glove box and read it thoroughly. I can almost guarantee that you will learn things you never knew about your vehicle.
And one more tip; not all states require it, but when you have windshield wipers on, you should also put your car headlights on, and I don’t mean just parking lights. It will make your vehicle easier to see by oncoming traffic, especially in downpours or in blowing snow.
I received a response on this column that seemed to warrant an addendum. If you have an ABS system on your vehicle, you might want to consider disabling it during the winter when road conditions deteriorate. The computer-assisted braking cannot react like the human brain can when a skid begins. ABS Braking action in ice and snow might prolong your stopping the skid, putting you in harm's way.
All you have to do to disable the system is pull the fuse, but make sure you replace it after the conditions improve. However, if you don't feel comfortable without the ABS system, then ignore this advice and let it do the braking while you concentrate on steering.
Be safe out there.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Saving Lives
I am going to combine two topics this week from prior columns I wrote last year. The two are related anyway, even though they covered seemingly different aspects of the same event. That event is chest pain, most often resulting in a heart attack.
First, a disclaimer: I am not a doctor, and I have absolutely no medical education or training. I do not pretend to be an expert on cardiac events. If you do not trust what I write below, please consult your family doctor, or better yet, a cardiologist to verify the text and the procedures.
I do consider myself an authority, since I have so far survived at least six cardiac events exactly like those I am about to describe. You don’t get any better experience than that, unless you are a treating physician who specializes in cardiac care.
Apparently my column about cough CPR must have had some effect, since I have only received one subsequent message on the subject. But, just in case you missed that column, I will briefly recap it for you.
There is an “urban legend” circulating via e-mail about what to do if you experience severe chest pain while driving alone. The recommended action is to breath heavily and cough repeatedly while you drive yourself to the nearest emergency room.
While the action above seems logical and lifesaving, the opposite is actually true. As a survivor of several cardiac events such as that described above—though not while driving alone—I can assure you that it is nearly impossible to take a deep breath while in the throes of a heart attack. I can also attest to the fact that coughing only exacerbates the condition, and can easily put you into cardiac fibrillation, the complete arrhythmia of heart muscle referred to as “a bag of worms.” Untreated for a very short time, fibrillation leads to only one conclusion: death.
If you should ever experience sudden chest pain of any kind, there is only one correct way to proceed.
1. First, if you are driving, pull over to the shoulder and put on your hazard warning lights.
2. If you have a cell phone, dial 9-1-1 and get help. If you don’t have one, then try to signal to another driver that you need help.
3. If you carry nitro pills, and most heart patients do, slip one under your tongue. If you don’t have nitro, but you have aspirin, swallow two of those. It won’t help as much as nitro, but it will help some.
4. Once you know that help is on the way, recline your seat, or lie on the ground and remain quiet. Get a blanket or coat to keep warm.
5. If you lose consciousness before help arrives, CPR is more effective if you are in the prone position on your back.
I have one other warning regarding the onset of chest pain, and I know you’ve heard it before. Don’t ignore it or go into denial as to what caused it. Get help as soon as possible. If it is gas or stomach cramps, then lucky you.
Now, suppose you are the one who comes upon someone having a heart attack, or who collapses in front of you. The question here is “What do you do?” If that person is a stranger, you might be reluctant to do anything, but if it is a friend or a relative, you definitely will want to do something to help.
Until recently, the prescribed treatment was to administer CPR, but that required that you be trained and certified in the procedure. It also meant that you were going to have to do something most of us consider gross. That is, you would have to give the kiss of life, breathing into the stricken person’s mouth. What are the chances the victim will be a knockout member of the opposite sex?
In actual experience, the stricken person tends to gasp during chest compressions, so some air is being inhaled even without mouth-to-mouth. Also, the lungs are never completely collapsed, so oxygenation of blood is not really an issue.
Hands-only CPR has now taken the place of the prior compression and mouth-to-mouth combination CPR. The hands-only CPR not only keeps a steady rhythm to the compressions, but it also removes the objectionable part of the procedure that has frequently prevented CPR from being performed. In my opinion, it will likely cause a much higher incidence of recovery from sudden cardiac events.
The new hands-only CPR requires the rescuer to perform continuous chest compressions at a rate of 100 per minute. That compares to a rate of 30-40 compressions per minute with an irregular rhythm in the former CPR technique. The survival rate is likely to go up with the new guidelines.
Hands-only CPR
If someone collapses, stops normal breathing and is unresponsive to shaking, here are the steps you should take:
· First, have someone call 911 and summon help if a phone is handy.
· Put the person on the floor or other flat and firm surface face up.
· Place one hand atop the other in the center of the person’s chest.
· Push hard and fast, 100 compressions a minute.
· If there is another person with you, take turns. It is hard work.
· Continue compressions until paramedics arrive to take over.
(Source – American Heart Association)
If the person on whom you are performing CPR regains consciousness or shows signs of a return of heartbeat and breathing, you may quit your efforts, but do not move them and stay ready to begin again. Do not allow the victim to sit up, but make them as comfortable as possible.
There is a Website where you can learn more about hands-only CPR and even get some online training. Just click on the link here for the American Heart Association. Then be sure to read the links within that page. Other links can be found at the following sites.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/01/BAJ8VTF35.DTL
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/01/health/main3984803.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3984803
First, a disclaimer: I am not a doctor, and I have absolutely no medical education or training. I do not pretend to be an expert on cardiac events. If you do not trust what I write below, please consult your family doctor, or better yet, a cardiologist to verify the text and the procedures.
I do consider myself an authority, since I have so far survived at least six cardiac events exactly like those I am about to describe. You don’t get any better experience than that, unless you are a treating physician who specializes in cardiac care.
Apparently my column about cough CPR must have had some effect, since I have only received one subsequent message on the subject. But, just in case you missed that column, I will briefly recap it for you.
There is an “urban legend” circulating via e-mail about what to do if you experience severe chest pain while driving alone. The recommended action is to breath heavily and cough repeatedly while you drive yourself to the nearest emergency room.
While the action above seems logical and lifesaving, the opposite is actually true. As a survivor of several cardiac events such as that described above—though not while driving alone—I can assure you that it is nearly impossible to take a deep breath while in the throes of a heart attack. I can also attest to the fact that coughing only exacerbates the condition, and can easily put you into cardiac fibrillation, the complete arrhythmia of heart muscle referred to as “a bag of worms.” Untreated for a very short time, fibrillation leads to only one conclusion: death.
If you should ever experience sudden chest pain of any kind, there is only one correct way to proceed.
1. First, if you are driving, pull over to the shoulder and put on your hazard warning lights.
2. If you have a cell phone, dial 9-1-1 and get help. If you don’t have one, then try to signal to another driver that you need help.
3. If you carry nitro pills, and most heart patients do, slip one under your tongue. If you don’t have nitro, but you have aspirin, swallow two of those. It won’t help as much as nitro, but it will help some.
4. Once you know that help is on the way, recline your seat, or lie on the ground and remain quiet. Get a blanket or coat to keep warm.
5. If you lose consciousness before help arrives, CPR is more effective if you are in the prone position on your back.
I have one other warning regarding the onset of chest pain, and I know you’ve heard it before. Don’t ignore it or go into denial as to what caused it. Get help as soon as possible. If it is gas or stomach cramps, then lucky you.
Now, suppose you are the one who comes upon someone having a heart attack, or who collapses in front of you. The question here is “What do you do?” If that person is a stranger, you might be reluctant to do anything, but if it is a friend or a relative, you definitely will want to do something to help.
Until recently, the prescribed treatment was to administer CPR, but that required that you be trained and certified in the procedure. It also meant that you were going to have to do something most of us consider gross. That is, you would have to give the kiss of life, breathing into the stricken person’s mouth. What are the chances the victim will be a knockout member of the opposite sex?
In actual experience, the stricken person tends to gasp during chest compressions, so some air is being inhaled even without mouth-to-mouth. Also, the lungs are never completely collapsed, so oxygenation of blood is not really an issue.
Hands-only CPR has now taken the place of the prior compression and mouth-to-mouth combination CPR. The hands-only CPR not only keeps a steady rhythm to the compressions, but it also removes the objectionable part of the procedure that has frequently prevented CPR from being performed. In my opinion, it will likely cause a much higher incidence of recovery from sudden cardiac events.
The new hands-only CPR requires the rescuer to perform continuous chest compressions at a rate of 100 per minute. That compares to a rate of 30-40 compressions per minute with an irregular rhythm in the former CPR technique. The survival rate is likely to go up with the new guidelines.
Hands-only CPR
If someone collapses, stops normal breathing and is unresponsive to shaking, here are the steps you should take:
· First, have someone call 911 and summon help if a phone is handy.
· Put the person on the floor or other flat and firm surface face up.
· Place one hand atop the other in the center of the person’s chest.
· Push hard and fast, 100 compressions a minute.
· If there is another person with you, take turns. It is hard work.
· Continue compressions until paramedics arrive to take over.
(Source – American Heart Association)
If the person on whom you are performing CPR regains consciousness or shows signs of a return of heartbeat and breathing, you may quit your efforts, but do not move them and stay ready to begin again. Do not allow the victim to sit up, but make them as comfortable as possible.
There is a Website where you can learn more about hands-only CPR and even get some online training. Just click on the link here for the American Heart Association. Then be sure to read the links within that page. Other links can be found at the following sites.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/01/BAJ8VTF35.DTL
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/01/health/main3984803.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3984803
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Looking Back
Every once in a while we have to slow down and review where we are and how we got there. I think the same holds true in writing what I proclaim to be words of wisdom. Some of my writings are serious and others are just sublime.
However, I have written a few columns over the past few years that require a second look, and the next three will be of that nature. I consider them critical to saving lives.
The first one is a revisit to a topic I addressed last year, but with the addition of a video attachment to emphasize the importance of the message. The next two will be equally important and (I hope) informative.
THAT SINKING FEELING
I was channel surfing last Sunday, looking for something besides golf or the Olympic games to watch and I came across Mythbusters, a show where the two hosts, Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman explore different myths and try to either prove or disprove them.
I watch the show on the Discovery Channel frequently, and they and a few others do some pretty bizarre stunts, many of which they warn you not to attempt at home. (As if that would stop you)
The episode I watched last week involved some pretty serious stuff. In fact, it was so serious, and the statistics so shocking, that I am going to try to recap their efforts and results for you.
The Myth: It is impossible to escape from a sinking vehicle with all the windows rolled up.
First the statistics: The American Automobile Association states that there are approximately 11,000 vehicles per year that are driven into water deep enough to submerge them. Of those drivers and passengers unfortunate enough to experience that calamity, 300 die before they can escape.
Wow! That makes the myth seem pretty accurate, but not completely so. The Mythbusters team purchased a used sedan, removed the engine so that there would be minimal environmental damage, and then replaced the weight of the engine with 700 pounds of barbell weights. That was so that the sinking would be realistic and the front end would go down first.
A high school with an outdoor pool allowed the test to be performed there. There were several safeguards used, too. Two rescue swimmers in full scuba gear were in the pool, and Jamie was sitting in the car’s rear passenger seat wearing a wet suit and rebreather.
Adam was the guinea pig in the driver’s seat, but even he had a full tank of air sitting on the front passenger seat, which he could use as necessary.
First, the car was submerged with all windows up, and Adam was instructed to attempt to escape. He tried to open the door, but was unable to do so until the entire passenger compartment had filled with water. By that time, he was completely out of breath and had to use the oxygen tank to save himself.
Adam also tried to open the windows, but the water pressure prevented even that measure. Hand cranks or electric assist for the windows made no difference. Nothing opened until the pressure inside and outside were equal, and that was (apparently) too late to save himself without the reserve tank.
Several more tests were performed, and three methods were effective. In the second test, Adam tried opening the door as soon as possible after hitting the water. The water had not yet reached more than a few inches up the side of the door, so pressure hadn’t built up. Although he had to really work hard to push the door open, Adam was able to escape and float to the surface.
Next, Adam used several common items that you might have in your pocket to try to break the window glass in order to either go out through it or speed up the flooding process so the door could be opened more quickly. Car keys and cell phone were useless.
However, a small metal hammer (you can buy one at any auto parts store) was totally effective in breaking the glass on the first try. A screwdriver also worked to break the glass. That allowed water in very quickly, and Adam was able to escape before he ran out of air.
Finally, Jamie suggested a third method of escape, using no aids whatsoever. He instructed Adam to keep calm, take several deep breaths while the water was coming up, and hold his breath until the door could be opened. That worked very well, and Adam claimed that he could have stayed in the car for another fifteen seconds if necessary.
The myth was “busted’ in three different ways. I cannot give the Mythbuster Team a perfect score, however. Adam was not wearing a seat belt. Dealing with that should have been the first priority.
Also, there were no passengers in the car, and we all know that young children and infants must be buckled in, too. Imagine trying to reach over the seat to unbuckle an infant in a car seat in that situation, or even telling your youngsters to unbuckle themselves. What parents would save themselves and leave children behind?
I don’t have any solution for the young passengers, and I know you couldn’t have a test run—it would scare the kids to death. But it is something you want to think about given those AAA statistics.
My conclusion is that if you are alone or with other adults in a vehicle that is sinking into deep water and you have one of the two tools mentioned above, your chance of surviving is excellent. If you have young kids, then your chances drop to fair. With an infant buckled into a car seat in the rear seat (as prescribed by law) your chances fall to near zero. I’m sorry, but that is the reality.
As educational, informative and interesting as the show was, I can’t imagine anyone remaining calm and performing all the necessary functions in a panic situation like the one described.
Perhaps you read the original column (8/21/08) and you failed to heed the advice to purchase one of the emergency hammers, or at least keep a heavy screwdriver within reach of the driver in your vehicle. If that is the case, just take a look at this short video to see how fast floodwater can wash out what was once a level road. View it and you will not drive onto a flooded highway again.
However, I have written a few columns over the past few years that require a second look, and the next three will be of that nature. I consider them critical to saving lives.
The first one is a revisit to a topic I addressed last year, but with the addition of a video attachment to emphasize the importance of the message. The next two will be equally important and (I hope) informative.
THAT SINKING FEELING
I was channel surfing last Sunday, looking for something besides golf or the Olympic games to watch and I came across Mythbusters, a show where the two hosts, Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman explore different myths and try to either prove or disprove them.
I watch the show on the Discovery Channel frequently, and they and a few others do some pretty bizarre stunts, many of which they warn you not to attempt at home. (As if that would stop you)
The episode I watched last week involved some pretty serious stuff. In fact, it was so serious, and the statistics so shocking, that I am going to try to recap their efforts and results for you.
The Myth: It is impossible to escape from a sinking vehicle with all the windows rolled up.
First the statistics: The American Automobile Association states that there are approximately 11,000 vehicles per year that are driven into water deep enough to submerge them. Of those drivers and passengers unfortunate enough to experience that calamity, 300 die before they can escape.
Wow! That makes the myth seem pretty accurate, but not completely so. The Mythbusters team purchased a used sedan, removed the engine so that there would be minimal environmental damage, and then replaced the weight of the engine with 700 pounds of barbell weights. That was so that the sinking would be realistic and the front end would go down first.
A high school with an outdoor pool allowed the test to be performed there. There were several safeguards used, too. Two rescue swimmers in full scuba gear were in the pool, and Jamie was sitting in the car’s rear passenger seat wearing a wet suit and rebreather.
Adam was the guinea pig in the driver’s seat, but even he had a full tank of air sitting on the front passenger seat, which he could use as necessary.
First, the car was submerged with all windows up, and Adam was instructed to attempt to escape. He tried to open the door, but was unable to do so until the entire passenger compartment had filled with water. By that time, he was completely out of breath and had to use the oxygen tank to save himself.
Adam also tried to open the windows, but the water pressure prevented even that measure. Hand cranks or electric assist for the windows made no difference. Nothing opened until the pressure inside and outside were equal, and that was (apparently) too late to save himself without the reserve tank.
Several more tests were performed, and three methods were effective. In the second test, Adam tried opening the door as soon as possible after hitting the water. The water had not yet reached more than a few inches up the side of the door, so pressure hadn’t built up. Although he had to really work hard to push the door open, Adam was able to escape and float to the surface.
Next, Adam used several common items that you might have in your pocket to try to break the window glass in order to either go out through it or speed up the flooding process so the door could be opened more quickly. Car keys and cell phone were useless.
However, a small metal hammer (you can buy one at any auto parts store) was totally effective in breaking the glass on the first try. A screwdriver also worked to break the glass. That allowed water in very quickly, and Adam was able to escape before he ran out of air.
Finally, Jamie suggested a third method of escape, using no aids whatsoever. He instructed Adam to keep calm, take several deep breaths while the water was coming up, and hold his breath until the door could be opened. That worked very well, and Adam claimed that he could have stayed in the car for another fifteen seconds if necessary.
The myth was “busted’ in three different ways. I cannot give the Mythbuster Team a perfect score, however. Adam was not wearing a seat belt. Dealing with that should have been the first priority.
Also, there were no passengers in the car, and we all know that young children and infants must be buckled in, too. Imagine trying to reach over the seat to unbuckle an infant in a car seat in that situation, or even telling your youngsters to unbuckle themselves. What parents would save themselves and leave children behind?
I don’t have any solution for the young passengers, and I know you couldn’t have a test run—it would scare the kids to death. But it is something you want to think about given those AAA statistics.
My conclusion is that if you are alone or with other adults in a vehicle that is sinking into deep water and you have one of the two tools mentioned above, your chance of surviving is excellent. If you have young kids, then your chances drop to fair. With an infant buckled into a car seat in the rear seat (as prescribed by law) your chances fall to near zero. I’m sorry, but that is the reality.
As educational, informative and interesting as the show was, I can’t imagine anyone remaining calm and performing all the necessary functions in a panic situation like the one described.
Perhaps you read the original column (8/21/08) and you failed to heed the advice to purchase one of the emergency hammers, or at least keep a heavy screwdriver within reach of the driver in your vehicle. If that is the case, just take a look at this short video to see how fast floodwater can wash out what was once a level road. View it and you will not drive onto a flooded highway again.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
My Apologies
Wow! I awoke from a weird dream one morning last week, and I was really confused. I had dreamt that I actually believed some things that I never would have thought to be true about science. In fact, even though I know that there are thousands of scientists who say it isn’t so, I was convinced in my dream—more like a nightmare—that man-made global warming was real.
Funny thing was, I was cold all night long, and I couldn’t get enough covers. In my dream I was petting polar bears and penguins and baby seals. I mean, it was strange.
Well, I spent the day feeling kind of ambivalent about my somnambulant change of mind, but then, it wasn’t anything that I had to apologize to anyone about. After all, dreams are personal, and only a shrink ever gets inside your head to examine them. It wasn’t that bad, I reasoned.
Then I opened my word processor this week to write my weekly web log, my Weekly Wisdom Column. That was when I discovered that not only had I dreamed about global warming, but also I apparently did something else unheard of—I must have sleep-typed. There in front of me was a whole column on the topic, and the author was a firm disciple of the Al Gore global warming myth.
And that author must have been me!!!
Okay, so I owe a double apology. The first is to all the skeptics like myself, who believe that this whole global warming thing is just part of a natural earth-sun cycle that occurs periodically. (A lot of scientists say that we were in a short period of warming, but the earth is currently cooling again.) So, my apologies if I gave you the false impression that I concur with the global warming crowd.
The second apology is to those of you who stay up to watch those late-night talk shows that I put down last week. I apologize to you because I do believe that you are probably among those global warming folks—most people who are avid Leno, Letterman, and O’Brien fans seem to be of the liberal persuasion as well. Therefore, I wouldn’t have reached you with my former apology.
Geez, this has been a confusing column, just like last week’s was, so I had better quit while I still have my sanity. However, in my defense and all kidding aside, if you read between the lines last week, you should have seen that I wrote it with tongue-in-cheek. I got some e-mail that told me some of you really took me seriously.
Nah, I’m still one of those right-wing conspirators that DHS Sec. Napolitano despises and warns against. I’m a “bitter clinger” after all.
Funny thing was, I was cold all night long, and I couldn’t get enough covers. In my dream I was petting polar bears and penguins and baby seals. I mean, it was strange.
Well, I spent the day feeling kind of ambivalent about my somnambulant change of mind, but then, it wasn’t anything that I had to apologize to anyone about. After all, dreams are personal, and only a shrink ever gets inside your head to examine them. It wasn’t that bad, I reasoned.
Then I opened my word processor this week to write my weekly web log, my Weekly Wisdom Column. That was when I discovered that not only had I dreamed about global warming, but also I apparently did something else unheard of—I must have sleep-typed. There in front of me was a whole column on the topic, and the author was a firm disciple of the Al Gore global warming myth.
And that author must have been me!!!
Okay, so I owe a double apology. The first is to all the skeptics like myself, who believe that this whole global warming thing is just part of a natural earth-sun cycle that occurs periodically. (A lot of scientists say that we were in a short period of warming, but the earth is currently cooling again.) So, my apologies if I gave you the false impression that I concur with the global warming crowd.
The second apology is to those of you who stay up to watch those late-night talk shows that I put down last week. I apologize to you because I do believe that you are probably among those global warming folks—most people who are avid Leno, Letterman, and O’Brien fans seem to be of the liberal persuasion as well. Therefore, I wouldn’t have reached you with my former apology.
Geez, this has been a confusing column, just like last week’s was, so I had better quit while I still have my sanity. However, in my defense and all kidding aside, if you read between the lines last week, you should have seen that I wrote it with tongue-in-cheek. I got some e-mail that told me some of you really took me seriously.
Nah, I’m still one of those right-wing conspirators that DHS Sec. Napolitano despises and warns against. I’m a “bitter clinger” after all.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Go Green!
Last Wednesday we celebrated Earth Day. This was the 40th anniversary of the original Earth Day on April 22, 1970. I know, some people would say that the 40th won’t come for another year, so I invite you to count on your fingers—or toes if you prefer—and you will find that the count will equal 40.
I vividly recall the first Earth Day, because that was also the day that our American Airlines freight terminal in Buffalo, New York burned to the ground. The resulting thick black smoke covered most of the surrounding area. It certainly was an argument for containing our carbon footprint.
Okay, I’ve finally come around, and I am now one of the believers. Global warming is real and we must do something to stem the tide and save the earth. The final proof was that ice shelf that broke away from Antarctica, even though scientists say that it actually has been cooler in Antarctica over the past decade.
I’ve also watched those poor polar bears floating away on the broken ice floes, and I really feel badly about that. Who did those cute bears ever hurt? Mankind must go green!
Now that I’ve joined the “save the earth” believers, I feel that I must contribute my own suggestion to lower man’s carbon footprint. We might not be in an irreversible trend, and I want to help. Therefore, here is my best effort to save the planet.
I recall that when I was just a kid, we never had late television shows. After the nightly news, sports and weather, the station always played the National Anthem, complete with a waving flag. Then the test pattern was broadcast for about ten minutes and the station went to bed for the night. Television didn’t come back on until about 6 AM.
I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve seen e-mail messages that reminisce about those “good old days” when we had the Star Spangled Banner, a prayer, and a test pattern to end the night for the TV stations. I don’t remember the prayer part, but the other two seem to have been in favor back then.
I figure that the six or so hours that television stations weren’t broadcasting, and viewers weren’t viewing saved us a lot of electricity. Think of it! One-quarter of each day was TV-free. And that was when we really only had a handful of stations broadcasting in the first place.
Now, increase the number of stations to what we have today on cable and satellite, and the carbon footprint is enormous. If we could go back to eighteen hours of broadcasting per day, it would save huge amounts of energy and green up the atmosphere in the bargain.
Of course, that would also mean that the late shows, The Tonight Show, David Letterman, Jimmy Kimmel Live, Larry King and such, would have to either cease or at the very least go to a prime time slot. If the late night comedians (and comediennes, not to exclude the women) are so darned good, wouldn’t they deserve to get prime time anyway?
In my opinion, the Late night entertainers should sacrifice themselves to help, and we should be willing to sacrifice our viewing pleasure, too. Isn’t it worth saving the earth for us to do this?
Most of the other fare on late night TV is trash, so we wouldn’t miss it at all. And just to save all that energy would be worth our giving up late night television.
There you have it… my contribution to Mother Earth. Gosh, I feel so much better now.
I vividly recall the first Earth Day, because that was also the day that our American Airlines freight terminal in Buffalo, New York burned to the ground. The resulting thick black smoke covered most of the surrounding area. It certainly was an argument for containing our carbon footprint.
Okay, I’ve finally come around, and I am now one of the believers. Global warming is real and we must do something to stem the tide and save the earth. The final proof was that ice shelf that broke away from Antarctica, even though scientists say that it actually has been cooler in Antarctica over the past decade.
I’ve also watched those poor polar bears floating away on the broken ice floes, and I really feel badly about that. Who did those cute bears ever hurt? Mankind must go green!
Now that I’ve joined the “save the earth” believers, I feel that I must contribute my own suggestion to lower man’s carbon footprint. We might not be in an irreversible trend, and I want to help. Therefore, here is my best effort to save the planet.
I recall that when I was just a kid, we never had late television shows. After the nightly news, sports and weather, the station always played the National Anthem, complete with a waving flag. Then the test pattern was broadcast for about ten minutes and the station went to bed for the night. Television didn’t come back on until about 6 AM.
I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve seen e-mail messages that reminisce about those “good old days” when we had the Star Spangled Banner, a prayer, and a test pattern to end the night for the TV stations. I don’t remember the prayer part, but the other two seem to have been in favor back then.
I figure that the six or so hours that television stations weren’t broadcasting, and viewers weren’t viewing saved us a lot of electricity. Think of it! One-quarter of each day was TV-free. And that was when we really only had a handful of stations broadcasting in the first place.
Now, increase the number of stations to what we have today on cable and satellite, and the carbon footprint is enormous. If we could go back to eighteen hours of broadcasting per day, it would save huge amounts of energy and green up the atmosphere in the bargain.
Of course, that would also mean that the late shows, The Tonight Show, David Letterman, Jimmy Kimmel Live, Larry King and such, would have to either cease or at the very least go to a prime time slot. If the late night comedians (and comediennes, not to exclude the women) are so darned good, wouldn’t they deserve to get prime time anyway?
In my opinion, the Late night entertainers should sacrifice themselves to help, and we should be willing to sacrifice our viewing pleasure, too. Isn’t it worth saving the earth for us to do this?
Most of the other fare on late night TV is trash, so we wouldn’t miss it at all. And just to save all that energy would be worth our giving up late night television.
There you have it… my contribution to Mother Earth. Gosh, I feel so much better now.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
RMD Waiver for 2009
I have some news for those of you who, like me, have reached the wonderful 70s, or as the Spanish say, tiene setenta años (have seventy years). I got the news from an article someone sent to me.
I realize that this column may not be of immediate help to those of you who are not yet septuagenarians—I was addressed that way recently, and didn’t know whether to take umbrage or pleasure in the title—and won’t be affected by this for years. However, many of you have parents who are in that range, so you need to inform them about this little-known change. Also, the waiver applies to those who are not yet 70½ but inherited a retirement plan or IRA that would normally require the RMD.
In these troubled times when many of us are suffering from IRA deficiency (a.k.a. Sapped Savings Syndrome), it may be welcome news that your beneficent federal government has seen fit to allow us to suspend the required minimum distribution (RMD) from our tax-deferred plans such as 401(k) or IRA accounts.
I will refer to accounts as IRAs, even though the same rules apply to any tax-deferred investment or savings account. The only difference is that each type of account, 401(k), 403(b), 457(b) or traditional IRA, must be treated and distributed separately. (That is a huge motivator for combining all personal retirement accounts into a single IRA once you retire.)
In case you don’t do your own taxes and you let your IRA holder figure out your distributions, the Required Minimum Distribution Rule says that you must withdraw a portion of your tax-deferred savings based on a life-expectancy table. That is supposed to deplete your IRA, forcing you to pay all the deferred taxes before you die.
The RMDs must start in the calendar year in which you turn 70½ and must be completely withdrawn by April 1st of the following year. The value of your IRA is based on its value on December 31st of the prior year. It is a fifteen-month window and that is a critical point in all this.
I won’t go into all the technical stuff about how to figure RMDs. If you don’t know that by now, then you better have a tax preparer who can do it for you. If you don’t withdraw the required amount, you can be heavily taxed and penalized for the oversight. Any required funds not withdrawn are taxed at 50 percent. If you fail to withdraw $1,000 from your account, you will have to pay out $500 in tax penalty.
The information I do want to impart to you is that, due to the downturn in the economy in general and in the stock market in particular during the past two years, many people in the category above have been forced to withdraw required minimum distributions on accounts that no longer have the value they did at the end of the previous year.
Near the end of President George W. Bush’s second term in office, December 23, 2008 to be exact, he signed the Worker, Retiree and Employer Recovery Act of 2008. Tucked inside that legislation is a waiver for RMDs in 2009.
Because the signing of the Recovery Act took place during the holidays, there was little if any reporting of it. Of course, it didn’t help that GWB was in severe disfavor with the American people in the final days of his administration either. No news media was willing to give him any credibility at all after the 2008 election.
Anyway, the signing of the Workers, Retirees and Employers Recovery Act of 2008 gives retirees the choice of whether or not to take distributions from their personal retirement accounts. In effect, if you have the income from company retirement, Social Security and other taxable sources to carry you through this turmoil, you can leave tax-deferred accounts alone to (hopefully) recover their values.
This provision would have been a big help last year too, since the current market slump started in May of 2008 and caused values of tax-advantaged accounts to decrease dramatically during the year. Those values were considerably higher at the end of 2007 and RMDs were calculated on those higher values.
Now comes the bad news. Even though the stock market is still in turmoil, the Recovery Act does not allow any waiver for next year. Unless Congress extends the provision or writes new legislation to cover that period, RMDs will be back in 2010. The current waiver only applies to the fifteen-month period between December 31, 2008 and April 1, 2010, the 2009 tax year for required minimum distributions.
Congress would have been kinder to the elderly by merely suspending the taxes due on the RMD withdrawals for 2009, thereby benefiting those who depend on those withdrawals to pay living expenses, the lower income retirees. If you are one of those, you will still have to withdraw the money and pay your taxes on it. Your only relief will be that you won’t be required to withdraw the entire sum if you can live on less than the full amount.
I realize that this column may not be of immediate help to those of you who are not yet septuagenarians—I was addressed that way recently, and didn’t know whether to take umbrage or pleasure in the title—and won’t be affected by this for years. However, many of you have parents who are in that range, so you need to inform them about this little-known change. Also, the waiver applies to those who are not yet 70½ but inherited a retirement plan or IRA that would normally require the RMD.
In these troubled times when many of us are suffering from IRA deficiency (a.k.a. Sapped Savings Syndrome), it may be welcome news that your beneficent federal government has seen fit to allow us to suspend the required minimum distribution (RMD) from our tax-deferred plans such as 401(k) or IRA accounts.
I will refer to accounts as IRAs, even though the same rules apply to any tax-deferred investment or savings account. The only difference is that each type of account, 401(k), 403(b), 457(b) or traditional IRA, must be treated and distributed separately. (That is a huge motivator for combining all personal retirement accounts into a single IRA once you retire.)
In case you don’t do your own taxes and you let your IRA holder figure out your distributions, the Required Minimum Distribution Rule says that you must withdraw a portion of your tax-deferred savings based on a life-expectancy table. That is supposed to deplete your IRA, forcing you to pay all the deferred taxes before you die.
The RMDs must start in the calendar year in which you turn 70½ and must be completely withdrawn by April 1st of the following year. The value of your IRA is based on its value on December 31st of the prior year. It is a fifteen-month window and that is a critical point in all this.
I won’t go into all the technical stuff about how to figure RMDs. If you don’t know that by now, then you better have a tax preparer who can do it for you. If you don’t withdraw the required amount, you can be heavily taxed and penalized for the oversight. Any required funds not withdrawn are taxed at 50 percent. If you fail to withdraw $1,000 from your account, you will have to pay out $500 in tax penalty.
The information I do want to impart to you is that, due to the downturn in the economy in general and in the stock market in particular during the past two years, many people in the category above have been forced to withdraw required minimum distributions on accounts that no longer have the value they did at the end of the previous year.
Near the end of President George W. Bush’s second term in office, December 23, 2008 to be exact, he signed the Worker, Retiree and Employer Recovery Act of 2008. Tucked inside that legislation is a waiver for RMDs in 2009.
Because the signing of the Recovery Act took place during the holidays, there was little if any reporting of it. Of course, it didn’t help that GWB was in severe disfavor with the American people in the final days of his administration either. No news media was willing to give him any credibility at all after the 2008 election.
Anyway, the signing of the Workers, Retirees and Employers Recovery Act of 2008 gives retirees the choice of whether or not to take distributions from their personal retirement accounts. In effect, if you have the income from company retirement, Social Security and other taxable sources to carry you through this turmoil, you can leave tax-deferred accounts alone to (hopefully) recover their values.
This provision would have been a big help last year too, since the current market slump started in May of 2008 and caused values of tax-advantaged accounts to decrease dramatically during the year. Those values were considerably higher at the end of 2007 and RMDs were calculated on those higher values.
Now comes the bad news. Even though the stock market is still in turmoil, the Recovery Act does not allow any waiver for next year. Unless Congress extends the provision or writes new legislation to cover that period, RMDs will be back in 2010. The current waiver only applies to the fifteen-month period between December 31, 2008 and April 1, 2010, the 2009 tax year for required minimum distributions.
Congress would have been kinder to the elderly by merely suspending the taxes due on the RMD withdrawals for 2009, thereby benefiting those who depend on those withdrawals to pay living expenses, the lower income retirees. If you are one of those, you will still have to withdraw the money and pay your taxes on it. Your only relief will be that you won’t be required to withdraw the entire sum if you can live on less than the full amount.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Travel Woes
There is a reason for my not writing the column last week. I’ve been on the road again, this time all by myself, and just completed a 3,000-mile trip to Western New York and Kansas City. I drove back to Augusta during the past two days, and it was quite the trip.
I know that after my escapades that I related regarding my trip to Maryland in February, some of you will think that I’m making this stuff up, but I can assure you that the events I’m about to tell you about actually happened.
My first leg of the trip home took me from Kansas City to Murfreesboro, Tennessee, just south of Nashville. It was a 600-mile drive, and it was really pretty boring for the first 400 miles. It was near the exit to Metropolis, Illinois—yes, there is a Metropolis, and they even have a statue of Superman in the town square—that the first incident took place.
It was 2:00 PM, and the last thing I expected to see at that time of day was three deer running toward the road as I approached. I swerved into the left lane, and the deer also swerved so that they were running parallel to my path. I just got past them when they turned and ran behind my car across the roadway and into the median.
I glanced in my rearview mirror to follow their travel across the northbound lane. A car traveling over there hit one of the deer and I watched it arc up and over into the median. I guess I said a little prayer of relief to myself, but I certainly felt bad for the driver of the car that had hit that animal. I know what kind of damage that can do, since I hit a deer several years ago and incurred about $4,000 worth of repairs as a result.
An hour later, as I neared Clarksville and Fort Campbell the sky was getting quite threatening. It wasn’t long before it started to rain, and I mean it was a deluge. I traveled 90 miles in a steady downpour. At times the rain was so heavy that the windshield wipers couldn’t work fast enough. Several cars and trucks pulled over to the side of the road, but I forged on.
At one point the rain was so heavy that it was cascading off of an elevated roadway north of Nashville, creating a temporary waterfall 20 to 30 feet wide onto the road below. There were some tornados and lots of wind shears in the area I was passing through. In fact, two semis were blown over in opposite lanes on Interstate 40 by the Nashville airport. The road was closed for a while both eastbound and westbound. I didn’t have to go through that bottleneck, but I did pass over the interstate at that junction going south and was able to see the traffic jam it had caused.
The last 200 miles of my trip that day were pretty exciting. I made it to my motel without any damage, but it was a nerve-wracking experience to drive through that storm while hearing about severe weather and tornados in the towns I had just passed.
Fortunately, the next day was uneventful, and I arrived home none the worse for the wear. I guess I’ll stay put for now. I’ve had enough excitement.
I know that after my escapades that I related regarding my trip to Maryland in February, some of you will think that I’m making this stuff up, but I can assure you that the events I’m about to tell you about actually happened.
My first leg of the trip home took me from Kansas City to Murfreesboro, Tennessee, just south of Nashville. It was a 600-mile drive, and it was really pretty boring for the first 400 miles. It was near the exit to Metropolis, Illinois—yes, there is a Metropolis, and they even have a statue of Superman in the town square—that the first incident took place.
It was 2:00 PM, and the last thing I expected to see at that time of day was three deer running toward the road as I approached. I swerved into the left lane, and the deer also swerved so that they were running parallel to my path. I just got past them when they turned and ran behind my car across the roadway and into the median.
I glanced in my rearview mirror to follow their travel across the northbound lane. A car traveling over there hit one of the deer and I watched it arc up and over into the median. I guess I said a little prayer of relief to myself, but I certainly felt bad for the driver of the car that had hit that animal. I know what kind of damage that can do, since I hit a deer several years ago and incurred about $4,000 worth of repairs as a result.
An hour later, as I neared Clarksville and Fort Campbell the sky was getting quite threatening. It wasn’t long before it started to rain, and I mean it was a deluge. I traveled 90 miles in a steady downpour. At times the rain was so heavy that the windshield wipers couldn’t work fast enough. Several cars and trucks pulled over to the side of the road, but I forged on.
At one point the rain was so heavy that it was cascading off of an elevated roadway north of Nashville, creating a temporary waterfall 20 to 30 feet wide onto the road below. There were some tornados and lots of wind shears in the area I was passing through. In fact, two semis were blown over in opposite lanes on Interstate 40 by the Nashville airport. The road was closed for a while both eastbound and westbound. I didn’t have to go through that bottleneck, but I did pass over the interstate at that junction going south and was able to see the traffic jam it had caused.
The last 200 miles of my trip that day were pretty exciting. I made it to my motel without any damage, but it was a nerve-wracking experience to drive through that storm while hearing about severe weather and tornados in the towns I had just passed.
Fortunately, the next day was uneventful, and I arrived home none the worse for the wear. I guess I’ll stay put for now. I’ve had enough excitement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)