Saudi Arabia's building the new tallest building in the World. The Jeddah Tower. 3,280 Feet tall. 200 floors. Wow! The Liberty Tower in NYC is 1,776 feet tall and 104 floors. "Constructing it will require about 5.7 million square feet of concrete and 80,000 tons of steel" "Building a structure that tall, particularly on the coast, where saltwater could potentially damage it, is no easy feat. The foundations, which will be 200 feet (60 meters) deep, need to be able to withstand the saltwater of the nearby ocean. As a result, Advanced Construction Technology Services will test the strength of different concretes." "Wind load is another issue for buildings of this magnitude. To counter this challenge, the tower will change shape regularly." "Because it changes shape every few floors, the wind loads go round the building and won't be as extreme as on a really solid block," "Delivering the concrete to higher floors will also be a challenge. Possibly, engineers could use similar methods to those employed when building the Burj Khalifa; 6 million cubic feet of concrete was pushed through a single pump, usually at night when temperatures were low enough to ensure that it would set." http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/30/world/meast/saudi-arabia-worlds-tallest-building-jeddah-tower/index.html
What do you do with the millions and millions of old tires......
How about crush them up and make artificial turf out of them. Sounds like a great idea except the old tires are made with many chemicals including many known carcinogens that cause cancer.
Soccer goalies who spend a lot of time diving, and rolling around, and inhaling, and ingesting these toxic pieces of rubber have been coming down with cancer and dying.
The government does not want to talk about it. They don't want to study it.
If the government studies the problem they will realize how big it is.
There are 12,000 sports fields in the United States made with crumb rubber. Those would all need to be changed once the government confirmed they are giving people cancer. Better to just ignore the problem and hope it goes away. That is exactly what they are doing.
Telling the Billionaire owners of the NFL that all their fields have to be changed is not something the government wants to do. So they will just close their eyes tight and think happy thoughts.....
"let’s just take the iPhone. The iPhone was not something that was invented in Apple’s labs. The iPhone has a touchscreen — well, Apple didn’t invent the touchscreen, the touchscreen was invented by an NSF grant to the Library of Congress for their visitor program. The iPhone can tell you where you are on the Earth’s surface — well those are GPS satellites, launched by the military, now a highly commercialized role, initially only a military role — but Apple did not invest in these satellites to make its iPhone find where you are on Earth. So who would’ve thought you could take these things, put them together, and have that become your product."
"You’re missing the fact that we only declared we’re going to the Moon because we were at war with the Soviet Union, we were in a cold war, so this is a war of technologies. The fact that Sputnik was launched in a hollowed out intercontinental ballistic missile shell — no one thought about the space over the atmosphere. We knew that you could control your own airspace, but how about your "space" space?"
"So there was our sworn enemy’s spacecraft flying over our head, and we knew it because they would send out radio signals and you could detect it. And so that’s why we went to the Moon. We didn’t go to the Moon because we’re explorers or discoverers, or we’re Americans. There’s a whole delusional front story that we tell ourselves about that era. And then, when we don’t go end up going to Mars, people cry foul. It was war that got us there, so let’s just be honest about that."
"Once you know what the actual drivers are, if you want to continue to achieve that goal, then you can at least base it on the reality of people’s decisions rather than what you wish they were."
"It seems really easy to delude ourselves about the state of space now, right? We look at a company like Mars One and say, "Oh yeah, totally, that seems possible. A reality show would definitely fund a mission to Mars." Or even SpaceX, we’ve looked at that company with wide eyes and only now question them after a very public failure.
The delusion that relates to private spaceflight isn’t really what you’re describing. They’re big dreams, and I don’t have any problems with people dreaming. Mars One, let them dream. That’s not the delusion."
"The delusion is thinking that SpaceX is going to lead the space frontier. That’s just not going to happen, and it’s not going to happen for three really good reasons: One, it is very expensive. Two, it is very dangerous to do it first. Three, there is essentially no return on that investment that you’ve put in for having done it first. So if you’re going to bring in investors or venture capitalists and say, "Hey, I have an idea, I want to put the first humans on Mars." They’ll ask, "How much will it cost?" You say, "A lot." They’ll ask, "Is it dangerous?" You’ll say, "Yes, people will probably die." They’ll ask, "What’s the return on investment?" and you’ll say "Probably nothing, initially." It’s a five-minute meeting. Corporations need business models, and they need to satisfy shareholders, public or private."
"A government has a much longer horizon over which it can make investments. This is how it’s always been. And the best example, I think, is Christopher Columbus. That was not a private mission. There were some private monies in the public monies that were used, but basically the mission statement was established by Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand, and they said go plant the flag wherever you land. There’s hegemonistic motivation, and it wasn’t specifically military at the time, but Spain certainly had an armada to back up their land grabs. Only after that, only after Christopher Columbus comes back and says, "Here are the people that I found, here are the foods, and here are the trade winds," only then does the Dutch East India Trading Company come in and make a buck off of it. They didn’t have to make that first investment. The risks were quantified, the cost was well understood, and the return on investment was calculable."
"That is a recurring model in the history of our civilization, and I don’t see any reason why that would be any different from advancing a frontier such as that in space.
So what is SpaceX doing now? They’re bringing cargo back and forth to the space station, as should have been happening decades ago."
"You don’t need NASA to move cargo, you get NASA to do the things that have never been done before. And then when they do it enough and there’s a routine, then you farm it off to private enterprise, which can actually do it more efficiently than you can, and presumably make a buck for having done so."
As the Republicans warn you about the Muslim Terror threat (which could kill you and your family at any moment) the actual person doing the killing (and terrorizing) is a White guy.
3 dead and 9 injured.
A real live terrorist attack on American soil and not a Muslim around.
That is right.....The guy doing all the killing is not aligned with Islam (at all) but is actually aligned with the Republican Party.
He shares the Republican view point that Abortion is wrong, Planned Parenthood is despised, and guns are the answer.
If you go to a Republican Presidential speech (today) you will not hear Donald Trump mention this terror attack. You will not hear Marco Rubio, or Jeb Bush, (or any of the others) bring up this attack either. They don't want you to think about the actual threat the American people face by their right wing followers.
To Republicans it is wrong to label all right wingers as dangerous to the public.......... but by all means continue to label all Muslims anyway you like.
Goldman Sachs hired this guy from Communist Red China to oversea their employee compliance. Goldman gave this guy all kinds of secret access. The guy then took that access and used it to steal almost half million dollars for himself and then fled back to Communist Red China.
Everyone at Goldman is now scratching their heads wondering where they went wrong. Oooooh.....Ooooooh......I know...... I know where you went wrong. Ask me........Ask me. I will be happy to explain it to you.
Elon Musks Rocket errors are raining down all over the globe. This one was found in England. This is the great success we heard the private sector was going to bring to the space program. Impressive. Oh hey look it is a whale......No... no.... not a whale...... just another one of Elon Musks screw-ups.
When NASA ran the space program the chances an average person could see a rocket up close was remote. That is because the NASA rockets generally ended up in Space. But with Elon Musk is in charge ones chances of encountering a rocket are greatly improved.
Elons rockets could fall out of the sky anywhere. You might want to go check your back yard right now because one could be back there.
The next Indiana Jones movie will be entitles Raiders of the Lost Space X Rocket. Indy will be spanning out across the Globe in search of the Rocket that took off from Florida and was never seen again. At this point it could be anywhere.......Well anywhere except in Space.
Billionaires get to be Billionaires by taking advantage of people. That is how it is done.
Last month we heard about how sh*tty it is to work at Amazon.com and Jeff Bezos. Now we learn about how sh*tty it is to work for Space X and Elon Musk.
The way you end up with all of the money is you have your employees punch their time cards out and then you send them back to their desks to work some more.
Not only do you not have to pay them overtime..... but you don't have to pay them regular time either. It is a great way to keep your company productive....... while also keeping all the money in your wallet.
Sure it is illegal...... but when you are a billionaire those rules do not apply to you. Rules are for regular people, not rich people.
A former SpaceX employee has filed a class action lawsuit against the rocket company, saying hourly employees are regularly expected to work overtime hours without proper compensation.
It's at least the fourth lawsuit alleging SpaceX violated California labor law to be filed since 2014.
The lead plaintiff in this case, Stan Saporito, worked as a structures technician at the Hawthorne, California-based company between June 2013 and February 2015. During that time he and other employees were forced to end their shift at the timekeeper and get back to work
“SpaceX required [Saporito] and [other hourly employees] to work off the clock without paying them for all the time they were under SpaceX's control performing post-shift duties, specifically by failing to provide enough labor hours to accomplish all the job tasks that SpaceX expected [them] to complete,”
“[They] were required to clock out of SpaceX's timekeeping system in order to perform additional work for SpaceX as required to meet SpaceX's job requirements.”
SpaceX, founded by Elon Musk and based in Hawthorne, California, is notorious for overworking salaried employees, and dismissing them for minor infractions.
One lawsuit filed last year also alleged that SpaceX managers pressured workers with schedules that prohibited time for meal and rests breaks required by California law (which stipulates that employees who work more than five hours have a 30-minute meal break, and a second 30 minutes if they work more than 10 hours).
Another suit claimed SpaceX failed to give workers notice before a massive layoff in July.
Vote for Hillary Clinton because she is going to stand up to Wall Street.......Just as soon as she is finished counting the stacks and stacks and stacks of money Wall Street has piled up all around her.
It is not easy counting $35,000,000.00. It takes a bit of time but as soon as she is done she will be happy to tell you all about how she is going to stand up to Wall Street. She will tell you how she is not too cozy with them and there is nobody better to fix the problems on Wall Street than the lady who is drowning in money from Wall Street.
Hillary's top priority is the little guy who is NOT throwing money at her. That is who Hillary cares most about. Hillary stays awake at night trying to figure out how she can help the people who give her no money.
The money she has received won't taint Hillary at all ...No sir. Hillary is all about representing Main Street. (Oh damned.....She lost count again. Now she has to start counting again.) Hillary will be back with you shortly.
In the 18 months prior to announcing her second campaign for president, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination addressed private equity investors in California and New York, delivered remarks to bankers in Hilton Head, South Carolina, and spoke to brokers at the Ritz-Carlton in Naples, Florida.
Her efforts capped a nearly 15-year period in which Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, made at least $35 million by giving 164 speeches to financial services, real estate and insurance companies after leaving the White House in 2001.
The long and lucrative relationship between the Clinton family and the nation's finance industry has emerged as a key issue in her Democratic primary race. Her rivals, including Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, accuse her of being too cozy with Wall Street and the industry she once represented as a senator from New York.
The bulk of the Clintons' paid speeches to the financial industry came after the 2008 economic crash. From 2009 to 2014, the couple made $26 million from 109 appearances sponsored by banks, insurance companies, hedge funds, private equity firms and real estate businesses, and at those industries' conferences and before their trade organizations.
Exactly what the Clintons said in their speeches is hard to find. Although many of the remarks were given to large groups, reporters were typically barred. Often, Hillary Clinton's contract expressly prohibited the remarks from being broadcast, transcribed or 'otherwise reproduced,' according a copy of her agreement for one speech with the University of Buffalo.
Still, some details have trickled out.
When she addressed the National Multifamily Housing Council in April 2013, she focused on foreign affairs, including the Arab Spring and North Korea, and deflected questions about whether she would run for president, according to a post on the organization's website that has since been taken down.
Beyond the personal income, Clinton also has close political ties to the finance industry. Over the course of her career, from her 2000 run for the Senate to the two presidential campaigns, people working in the finance, insurance and real estate industries have given her campaigns about $35 million — more than donors from any other lines of work, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Her top two contributors over those years were employees from Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, the center found.
Since her husband left the White House, the family's charity, the Clinton Foundation, has collected millions more from the industry, with companies such as Barclay's, Citigroup, Fidelity, HSBC and Goldman Sachs listed as donating as much as $5 million each.
It is rare to see unions working the way unions are supposed to work. The workers had a voice, and used that voice to get a better deal. That is rare in 2015 but good to see.
The issue was a few years back (when the Big 3 were on life support) the companies demanded (and received) concessions from their workers.
On wages workers agreed that the next generation (yet to be hired) could get screwed over. Current employees wages would be protected but all the new union employees would get paid less. That is a common Union practice.....Screw the people who are not yet there who do not have a voice. The NFL did this same thing as did the NBA. The new rookies all get screwed.
But a few years later all the new employees now have a vote (and a voice) and they don't like getting paid a lot less then the older employees. So in the UAW case they fought back and got a better deal.
But the strategy collapsed on Oct. 1, when workers at Fiat Chrysler overwhelmingly rejected a proposed contract that did not eliminate the divisive two-tier wage system.
“We showed we aren’t quite as naïve as they thought,” said Scott McGinnis, an entry-level worker at a Fiat Chrysler plant in Michigan. “After that first agreement, a lot of people were insulted.”
It was a stunning rebuke of the company and the U.A.W. leadership, and completely altered the course of the talks — and ultimately the cost structures of G.M., Ford and Fiat Chrysler.
Since then, all three companies have agreed to contracts that provide a defined path for every worker to earn the top union wage of $29 an hour.
The richer contracts also underscore how healthy the Detroit companies have become since G.M. and what was then the Chrysler Corporation slipped into bankruptcy and needed government bailouts to survive just six years ago.
Sales of new vehicles in the United States are expected to hit 17 million this year, the most in a decade, and possibly exceed that in 2016. In that environment, the time was ripe for workers to cash in.
Ms. Dziczek estimated that over the life of the four-year agreements, average hourly labor costs — including health care and other benefits — will rise about 5 percent at Ford, 9 percent at G.M., and 19 percent at Fiat Chrysler.
But even with the wage increases and a combined payout of nearly $1 billion in signing bonuses for union workers, the automakers are still well positioned for strong earnings, and able to invest in plant improvements and technology.
interviews with workers and union officials show that anger on the shop floor over two-tier wages was the deciding factor in the changes in the contracts.
On Sept. 15, Mr. Williams emerged from talks with Fiat Chrysler’s chief executive, Sergio Marchionne, with an initial contract proposal that would have raised lower-tier workers’ pay to $25 an hour, from $16 to $19 an hour, over the life of the deal.
“We won tremendous gains,” Mr. Williams said at a news conference, in which he hugged Mr. Marchionne for their collective effort.
But a few days later, a top U.A.W. bargainer, Norwood Jewell, was heckled and booed when he presented the tentative agreement to workers at Fiat Chrysler’s big Jeep plant in Toledo, Ohio.
A video of the meeting, posted on a socialist website, illustrated the clash. Mr. Jewell was shouted down as he defended terms of the agreement, with one worker yelling out, “Are you working for us or Sergio?”
When the contract went to a vote, about 87 percent of the 4,800 workers in the plant voted against it. Other factories also turned it down by big margins. When the final results came in, 65 percent of Fiat Chrysler’s 37,000 workers had rejected it.
“There was a lot of anger because people had an expectation that since Chrysler was in the black again, selling vehicles and making profits, it was our time,” said George Windau, a veteran worker at the Toledo plant.
The head of the plant’s union local, Bruce Baumhower, said his members were upset that the proposed deal left entry-level workers well short of the top union wage.
“They wanted to see a way to eliminate that,” he said. “But what they got left them about five dollars short.”
After the defeat, the U.A.W. leadership reopened talks with Fiat Chrysler.
The union also hired a public relations firm, BerlinRosen, to improve communications with workers on the U.A.W.’s website and Facebook pages.
Within a week, a new deal was struck between the union and Fiat Chrysler with a crucial concession — lower-paid workers would reach the top wage scale after eight years of service. The new agreement was then ratified by a vote of Fiat Chrysler workers, and used as a template for the contracts at G.M. and Ford.
But without the lopsided defeat of the first proposal, the two-tier system would have stayed in place for another four years.
“I was kind of surprised it went down because I didn’t think we were so united,” said Ms. Rau, who has worked for six years at the company’s Jeep plant in Detroit.
Why does the message of High Fructose Corn Syrup get so
clouded…..Because companies like Coca Cola want it that way. Big money is in control and the message you
receive will be edited and approved by Coke.
A nonprofit founded to combat obesity says the $1.5 million it
received from Coke has no influence on its work.
emails obtained by The Associated Press show the world's largest beverage maker
was instrumental in shaping the Global Energy Balance Network, which is led by
a professor at the University of Colorado School of Medicine.
Coke helped pick the group's leaders, edited its mission
statement and suggested articles and videos for its website.
an email last November, the group's president tells a top Coke executive:
"I want to help your company avoid the image of being a problem in
peoples' lives and back to being a company that brings important and fun things
executives had similarly high hopes. A proposal circulated via email at the
company laid out a vision for a group that would "quickly establish itself
as the place the media goes to for comment on any obesity issue." It said
the group would use social media and run a political-style campaign to counter
the "shrill rhetoric" of "public health extremists" who want
to tax or limit foods they deem unhealthy.
When contacted by the AP about the emails, Coca-Cola Co. CEO
Muhtar Kent said in a statement that "it has become clear to us that there
was not a sufficient level of transparency with regard to the company's
involvement with the Global Energy Balance Network."
we have more work to do to reflect the values of this great company in all that
we do," Kent said.
Atlanta-based company told the AP it has accepted the retirement of its chief
health and science officer, Rhona Applebaum, who initially managed the
relationship with the group. It said it will not fill the position as it
overhauls how it goes about its health efforts. It also said it has stopped
working with the Global Energy Balance Network.
just the latest example of Coke working with outside experts to promote
messages that benefit the company.
has long maintained that the academics and other experts it works with espouse
their own views. But the collaborations can be fraught and blur the lines
between advertisements and genuine advice.
In February, several health and fitness experts paid by the
company wrote online posts with tips on healthy habits. Each suggested a
mini-soda as a snack idea.
dietitian wrote five such posts in less than a year.
Global Energy Balance Network came under fire in August after The New York Times
reported it was funded by Coke. On Nov. 6, the University of Colorado School of
Medicine said it was returning $1 million from the company because of the
distraction it was creating. The University of South Carolina said it plans to
keep $500,000 it received from Coke because one of its professors is also among
the group's leaders. The school said there was no misuse of funds.
its website, the Global Energy Balance Network says it received an
"unrestricted gift" from Coke, but that the company has "no input"
into its activities.
the scenes, however, Coke executives and the group's leaders held meetings and
conference calls to hash out the group's mission and activities, according to
emails obtained through a public records request. Early on, Applebaum informed
the group's president, James Hill, that those involved would need to be open
about collaboration with private industry.
is non-negotiable," she wrote.
minor matters, such as the group's logo, were also covered.
will not be an issue — except for blue. Hope you can understand why,"
cans are red, while Pepsi's are blue.
seems like another one of these classic cases of money coming from industry
with no strings attached — that's the official message. But it's a very
different kind of story taking place," said Leigh Turner, an associate
professor at the University of Minnesota's Center for Bioethics who studies
academic integrity and conflicts of interest.
exchanges weren't strictly limited to discussions about the group, and included
Applebaum expressing approval or disapproval of health articles, and talk of
other work with Coke. In an email to another Coke executive, Hill proposes
research on "energy balance" that would be "very specific to
has long stressed the idea of "energy balance," or the need to offset
calorie intake with physical activity. It's a basic concept few would disagree
with, but critics say the company uses it to downplay the effects of sugary
drinks by shifting more attention to the need for exercise.
an introductory video, one of the Global Energy Balance Network's leaders said
the media focuses on "eating too much, eating too much, eating too much —
blaming fast food, blaming sugary drinks and so on." The video has since
been taken down, and the group said the idea that it only focuses on physical
activity is inaccurate.
declined a request for a phone interview, but said in an email that the group's
strategy benefits "all who are concerned about obesity." He said Coke
provided input into the group's "organizational structure," but that
it was understood the company would be "hands off."
group wants to continue its work, he said.
2010, Coke said it gave $550,000 to Hill that was unrelated to the group. A big
part of that was research he and others were involved with, but the figure also
covers travel expenses and fees for speaking engagements and other work. It
does not include money from Coke's overseas divisions or industry groups such
as the American Beverage Association.
Look Muslim Terrorists killed 6 innocent people in the woods of Texas.
Oh wait…..no …..Never mind…………That was a white guy that did that. The news is so confusing.
In the comments I need everyone to write where they live and how many innocent people the Muslim Terrorists have killed today. I bet the numbers are going to be staggering based on all the hype. I will go first. In Connecticut they killed 0. I am sure the carnage in the rest of the country will be extensive though.